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

Docket No: 7245-18 
 Ref: Signature date  

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

Although he did not file your application 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 three-member panel of the Board, sitting in executive session, considered the application on 10 June 2019.  The names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.  The 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 his naval record, as well as applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. 

Your father reenlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on 30 September 1958.  On 12 November 1958, he began a period of unauthorized absence (UA). He was declared a “deserter” on 12 December 1958 until surrendering to civil authorities on 16 December 1958.  On 21 January 1959, he was convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) for violating Article 86 (UA) of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) for the foregoing UA.  He was sentenced to forfeitures of pay and confinement for 2 months.  He was UA again from 26 March until 16 April 1959 and from 1 – 19 May 1959.  On 5 June 1959, he was convicted by a second SPCM for violating Article 86 (UA) and Article 92 (failure to obey a lawful order) of the UCMJ.  He was sentenced to forfeiture of pay and confinement for 4 months.  On 31 March 1960, he received non-judicial punishment (NJP) for another period of UA.  On 28 September 1960, civilian authorities arrested him for numerous traffic citations and an outstanding arrest warrant, to which he subsequently pleaded guilty.  His command authorized 30 days of leave to allow him to serve jail time in lieu of paying the fines.  On 2 January 1961, he began another period of UA that continued until 16 January 1961.  On 19 January 1961, he was convicted by summary court­martial (SCM) for violating Article 86 (UA and missing movement of his ship) of the UCMJ.  On 10 February 1961, he was convicted by second SCM for violating Article 86 (UA and breaking restriction) of the UCMJ. 

On 8 February 1961, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of unfitness for duty.  After being afforded all of his procedural rights, he waived them, and his case was forwarded to the separation authority for review. His commanding officer recommended that he be discharged from the naval service with an other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service, and the separation authority approved his separation from the Navy.  On 14 April 1961, he received an OTH discharge due to unfitness for duty. 

Your father requested that the Board upgrade his discharge of 14 April 1961 to an honorable characterization of service. He had an honorable discharge on 29 September 1958 from his first enlistment.  He stated that exposure to radiation and asbestos resulted in numerous medical conditions.  He asserted that while on active duty he was considered to be UA when he was actually hospitalized for his medical conditions.  He provided post-service medical records (dating between 1996 and 2018), statements in support of VA claims (from 2001, 2007, and undated), and correspondence from the Social Security Administration regarding benefits.  Additionally, he provided a letter from you, detailing his struggles with his health issues over many years. 

The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors in this case, including his record of service and contentions, and concluded that these factors were insufficient to warrant a change to his discharge, given his misconduct that resulted in an NJP, four courts-martial, and a civilian arrest and confinement.  With respect to his contention that he was charged with UA while hospitalized, his service record shows that he was an inpatient in a naval hospital in February and March 1961; however, he was not charged with UA for that time period.  The Board noted that he did not provide any evidence of hospitalization in a civilian facility for any of the UA periods for which he was charged. 

It is regretted that the circumstances of his 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 matters, which will require you to complete and submit a new DD Form 149.  New matters are those not previously presented to or 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,