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

Docket No: 6984-19 
Ref: Signature Date 


This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record 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 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 three-member panel of the Board, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 February 2020.  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, as well as applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. 

You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on 8 June 1967. On 8 September 1969, you began a period of unauthorized absence (UA).  On 8 October 1969, you were declared a deserter.  On 6 May 1970, the Chief of Naval Personnel (CNP) sent you correspondence regarding your status as a deserter.  On 28 July 1970, you wrote a letter to the Navy stating that you were formerly in the Navy, currently living in , and your last duty station was the USS .  You requested the Navy provide you a letter detailing your experience operating boilers, turbines, and related machinery, and documenting the last rate you attained.  Additionally, you requested an administrative discharge.  Lastly, you stated you purchased bonds and wished to be reimbursed for the full amount which you estimated to be $2,000.00.  On 18 August 1970, the Navy (Enlisted Performance Division) replied, “You are advised that you are carried as a deserter.  A copy of the letter from CNP dated 6 May 1970 is enclosed.”  You were informed that no action would be taken on your request for an administrative separation, advised to return to naval jurisdiction, and that your bond issue was forwarded to Navy Finance Center.  On 2 February 1973, you wrote to the Navy and referred to the correspondence you received dated 18 August 1970. You again requested an administrative separation and wrote, in part:  “the term deserter is, I feel, not an accurate description of my status...I cannot see where Naval justice is being served by keeping my record open as a deserter.” On 17 February 1973, the Navy sent you correspondence that your 2 February 1973 letter was received and placed in your record.  On 10 June 1975, the Navy (CNP) sent you a letter informing you that you were being considered for an undesirable discharge by reason of misconduct.  On 7 August 1975, you were discharged in absentia by reason of prolonged UA of one year or more.  On 18 August 1975, The Navy (CNP) sent you your DD Form 258N, Undesirable Discharge Certificate, via certified mail and you signed an acknowledgment of receipt and returned it to CNP. 

You request the Board upgrade your discharge to honorable.  You assert you were denied due process because you were not informed of the date and location of an administrative discharge hearing although the Navy was aware of your address.  You claim that as a foreigner you served 27 months of a 48-month contract honorably.  Additionally, you state you were not a US citizen, but a   citizen returning to your country of origin, and that you have served American industry overseas since 1975 and always supported US interests.  The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your record of service and contentions and concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change to your discharge given your misconduct.  With respect to your contention regarding due process, the Board noted you were advised to return to military jurisdiction, informed you were being considered for an undesirable discharge, and signed and returned the acknowledgement of receipt of your discharge certificate.  Further, there is no provision of law or in Navy regulations that allows for an upgrade to the characterization of service due solely to the passage of time. 

It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that favorable action cannot be taken.  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,