DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 

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

Docket No: 1860-16 
FEB 05 1017 

Dear : 

This is in reference to your application for correction ofyour naval record pursuant to the 
provisions oftitle 10 ofthe United States Code, section 1552. 

Although your application was not filed in a timely manner, the Board found it in the interest of 
justice to waive the statute oflimitations and consider your application on its merits. A threemember 
panel ofthe Board for Correction ofNaval Records, sitting in executive session, 
considered your application on 29 November 2016. The names and votes ofthe members ofthe 
panel will be furnished upon request. Your allegations oferror and injustice were reviewed in 
accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings ofthis 
Board. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted ofyour application, together 
with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, 
regulations, and policies. 

After careful and conscientious consideration ofthe entire record, the Board found the evidence 
submitted was insufficient to establish the existence ofprobable material error or injustice. 

You reenlisted in the Navy and continued a period of active duty on 19 January 1990. During 
the period from 18 December 1990 to I December 1992, you received nonjudicial punishment 
(NJP) on four occasions for assault, being drunk and disorderly, three periods ofunauthorized 
absence (UA) and disobedience ofa lawful order. In view ofthe foregoing, administrative 
discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct. Although not all documents are in your 
record, it appears that you elected to present your case before an administrative discharge board 
(ADB). The ADB found that you committed misconduct as evidenced by a pattern of 
misconduct and the commission ofa serious offense, and recommended that you received an 
General (under honorable conditions) discharge. However, your commanding officer 
recommended that you receive an other than honorable (OTH) discharge, and fon¥arded your 
case. The discharge authority directed a General discharge by reason of a pattern ofmisconduct, 
and on 20 October 1993, you were so discharged. 

The Board, in its review ofyour application and record, although incomplete, carefully 
considered your desire to upgrade your characterization ofservice based on your assertion that 
some ofthe charges that resulted in NJP and your discharge were not warranted. The Board 
concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge, given 
the seriousness ofyour misconduct which resulted in four NJPs. With regard to your assertion, 
the Board noted that an ADB found that you had established a pattern ofmisconduct and the 
commission ofa serious offense that warranted administrative separation, and that your 
commanding officer also concurred that your actions warranted administrative separation. The 
Board determined that you failed to substantiate that some ofthe charges were not warranted. 
Accordingly, your application has been denied. 

With regard to your request to have your pistol badge added to your DD Form 214 and a review 
ofany other awards you may be entitled to, your request is not under the purview ofthis Board, 
but und~r the cognizance ofthe Navy Personnel Command. In this regard, you may wish to . 
contact, in writing, the Department ofthe Navy, Navy Personnel Command (BUPERS), 
, to request assistant regarding this matter. 

It is regretted that the circumstances ofyour case are such that favorable action cannot be taken. 
You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon submission ofnew and material 
evidence within one year from the date ofthe Board's decision. New evidence is evidence not 
previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in your case. In this regard, it is 
important to keep in mind that a presumption ofregularity attaches to all official records. 
Consequently, when applying for a correction ofan official naval record, the burden is on the 
applicant to demonstrate the existence ofprobable material error or injustice. 

Sincerely, 


Executive Director