DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 00212-16 JAN 03 2017 Dear : This is in reference to your application for correction of your 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 23 September 2016. The names and votes of the 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 began a period ofactive duty in the Navy on 31 October 1975. On I October 1976, you were counseled regarding allegations that you injured a local resident in the Philippines and informed that you had 30 days in which to make a good faith effort to resolve a civil case with authorities in the Philippines. On 4 November 1976, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP), but the specific charge about the NJP was not documented. On 5January1977, you received NJP for striking a petty officer and falsely submitting a false identification card application. On 26January1977, your commanding officer recommended that you be administratively discharged with a general characterization ofservice on the basis ofimmature personality disorder. Your commanding officer noted that the civil proceedings in the Philippines were settled amicably. On 23 February 1977, you were discharged from the Navy with a general characterization ofservice. The Board considered that you have a 100% service-connected disability but that you do not qualify for certain benefits such as tax exemptions for home buying in Nevada unless your characterization ofservice is honorable, and that you would like to upgrade your service characterization. When making its determination, the Board noted that you served approximately one year and four months in the Navy, and that you were discharged with a general characterization ofservice. The Board, in its review ofyour entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your desire to upgrade your discharge. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization ofyour discharge given that your record reflects that you were properly recommended for a general discharge on the basis of a diagnosed medical disorder. The Board acknowledged that your service characterization may not entitle you to certain benefits, but found that the general characterization was reflective ofthe length and quality of your service, and that it was not issued in error and was not unjust. Accordingly, your application has been denied. It is regrettable 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 of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence ofprobable material error or injustice. Sincerely, Executive Director