DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No. 1728-19 Ref: Signature Date From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Ref: (a) 10 U.S.C. § 1552 Encl: (1) DD Form 149 with attachments (2) Excerpts from Subject's naval record 1. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the Marine Corps, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting that his Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge (DD Form 214) be corrected to upgrade the characterization of his service to “honorable.” 2. The Board, consisting of , reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 18 March 2020 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of the enclosures, relevant portions of Petitioner’s naval records, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. 3. The Board, having reviewed all the facts of record pertaining to Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice, finds as follows: a. Before applying to this Board, Petitioner exhausted all administrative remedies available under existing law and regulations within the Department of the Navy. b. Although enclosure (1) was not filed in a timely manner, it is in the interest of justice to waive the statute of limitations and review the application on its merits. c. Petitioner enlisted in the Marine Corps and began a period of active duty on 3 March 1966. On 30 November 1966, Petitioner arrived in the Republic of , where he was assigned to , 5th Marines as a rifleman. On 22 June 1967, he received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for unauthorized absence (less than 24 hours) and failure to obey a lawful order. On 12 October 1967, Petitioner was wounded in action during Operation Medina. On 8 December 1967, Petitioner departed RVN after participating in at least seven named combat operation as an infantryman, earning both the Combat Action Ribbon and the Purple Heart Medal. d. Upon his return to the United States, during the period from 18 March 1968 to 2 April 1969, Petitioner received three NJPs and one summary court-martial (SCM) for four separate periods of unauthorized absence (UA). On 16 July 1969, Petitioner began another period of UA that terminated on 13 January 1970, with his surrender to military authorities. On 28 January 1970, Petitioner submitted a written request for separation for the good of the service to avoid trial by court-martial for the aforementioned period of UA. Prior to submitting this request, Petitioner conferred with a qualified military lawyer at which time he was advised of his rights and warned of the probable adverse consequences of accepting such a discharge. As part of this discharge request, he admitted his guilt to the charge of UA and acknowledged that his characterization of service upon discharge would be under other than honorable (OTH) conditions. Petitioner’s request was granted and his commanding officer was directed to discharge him with an OTH characterization of service for the good of the service. On 1 April 1970, pursuant to his request, he was discharged. d. Petitioner contends that he was offered an early discharge and was told that after six months it would be changed to honorable. He asserts that had he known it was not going to be changed, he would not have taken the three month early discharge. CONCLUSION: Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, the Board finds the existence of an error and injustice warranting relief. The Board notes Petitioner’s disciplinary infractions and does not condone his misconduct. However, the Board considered the disciplinary infractions and his period of service in theatre and concluded that as a matter of clemency, the record should reflect that he was discharged with an honorable instead of an OTH characterization of service. Based on the foregoing, the Board concludes that no useful purpose is served by continuing to characterize his service as OTH and an upgrade in his characterization of service to honorable is appropriate. In view of the foregoing, the Board finds the existence of an error and injustice warranting the following corrective action: RECOMMENDATION: That Petitioner be issued a new DD Form 214 indicating that on 1 April 1970, Petitioner’s characterization of service was “honorable,” the narrative reason for separation and separation authority will be equivalent to “secretarial authority.” The reenlistment code will remain “RE­4.” A thorough review of Petitioner’s awards will be conducted and all eligible awards will be added to the DD Form 214. No further changes be made to Petitioner’s record. A copy of this report of proceedings be filed in Petitioner’s naval record. Upon request, the Department of Veterans Affairs be informed that Petitioner’s application was received by the Board on 29 January 2019. 4. It is certified that a quorum was present at the Board's review and deliberations, and that the foregoing is a true and complete record of the Board's proceedings in the above-entitled matter. 5. Pursuant to the delegation of authority set out in Section 6(e) of the revised Procedures of the Board for Correction of Naval Records (32 Code of Federal Regulations, Section 723.6(e)), and having assured compliance with its provisions, it is hereby announced that the foregoing corrective action, taken under the authority of the reference, has been approved by the Board on behalf of the Secretary of the Navy. 4/8/2020