DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 

Docket No: 4929-18 
APR O9 2019 


This is in reference to your application for correction for your naval record pursuant to Title 10, United States Code, Section 1552. After careful and conscientious consideration ofthe entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. Consequently, your application has been denied. 

Although your application was not filed in a timely manner, the Board found it in the interest of justice to waive the statute of limitations and consider your application on its merits. A three­member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 January 2019. The names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, relevant portions of your naval record, an advisory opinion (AO) provided by Navy Department Board of Decorations and Medals (NDBDM) dated 31 August 2018, as well as applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. 

You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active service on 8 April 1966. On 7 April 1969, you were discharged with an honorable characterization of service. Your Certificate ofRelease or Discharge from Active Duty (DD Form 214) reflects that you were awarded the National Defense Service Medal. 

The Board carefully weighed all relevant factors, such as your request to the entitlement of the Navy Good Conduct Medal (NGCM) and your contention, that you were not given the NGCM at the time of your discharge, and your contention that SECNA VIST 1650.IH states 3 years of service is required to receive the NGCM. The AO provided by NDBDM explains at the time of your separation in 1969, the NGCM required 4 years of qualifying service. The Board noted your naval records failed to reveal the minimum requirement of qualifying service. Consequently, the Board concurred with the AO. 

It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that favorable action cannot be taken at this time. You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon the submission of new and material evidence. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board. In this regard, it is important to keep in mind that a presumption of regularity attaches to all official records. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice. 

Sincerely, 

Executive Director