DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 

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

Docket No: 2484-16 
FEB O3 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 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 of your 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 on 28 September 1984 after more than three year ofprior service. 
You served for two months without disciplinary incident, but during the period from 
8 December 1984 to 11February1987, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on four 
occasions. Your offenses were failure to go to your appointed place ofduty, absence from your 
appointed place ofduty, resisting apprehension and failure to obey a lawful general regulation, 
wrongfully operating a privately owned vehicle while onboard Naval Air Station, , 
and making a false official statement. On 2 February 1987 and 17 February 1987, you were the 
subject ofpsychological evaluations due to admission ofsuicidal ideation, and refusing to eat for 
five days after being placed on restriction for resisting arrest. You stated in part, that you would 
do what you had to do to get out ofthe Navy. You were diagnosed with mixed personality 
disorder with severe schizotypal and borderline features that existed prior to enlistment and 
alcohol dependence. 


Subsequently, you were notified ofpending administrative separation by reason ofmisconduct 
due to commission ofa serious offense at which time you waived your procedural rights to 
consult with legal counsel and present your case to an administrative discharge board (ADB). 

Your commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by 
reason ofmisconduct due to commission ofa serious offense. The discharge authority approved 
this recommendation and directed separation under other than honorable conditions by reason 
misconduct, and on 27 March 1987, you were so discharged. 

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially 
mitigating factors, and your contentions that the military police on base were inexperienced and 
over-zealous in charging you with a DUI. Also, that a guilty verdict was given despite sworn 
testimony from your immediate supervisor. l'Jevertheless, the Board found that these factors 
were not sufficient to warrant relief in your case because ofthe seriousness of your misconduct 
that resulted in four NJPs. The Board noted that you waived your right to an ADB, your best 
opportunity for retention or a better characterization of service. In regard to your contentions the 
Board noted that there is no evidence in your record, and you submitted none, to support your 
claims. In the end the Board concluded that the severity ofyour misconduct outweighed your 
desire to upgrade your discharge. Accordingly, your application has been denied. 

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 submission of new and material 
evidence within one year from the date ofthe Board's decision. l'Jew evidenceis 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