DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 

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

Docket No: 02971-16 
APR 20 2017 

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 4 January 2017. 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. 

Yo1l began a period of active duty in the Navy on 22 April 1987, and served until you were 
honorably discharged on 14November1989. You immediately reenlisted and began a second 
period ofduty on 15 November 1989. You served for nearly four years in your second 
enlistment without disciplinary incident. On 2 November 1993, you were apprehended by 
authorities in ; you were arraigned on 5 November 1993, and returned to 
Detention Center. On 25 January 1994, you pied guilty to all charges. On 11 
March 1994, you were sentenced to serve 12 months in Adult Detention Center 
and pay court costs. You were released from civilian custody on 6 May 1994, and returned to 
military duty. After your return, you had three instances ofunauthorized absence (13-14 August 
1994, 16-17 October 1994, and 19-21December1994). You requested an other than honorable 
discharge in lieu oftrial; your request was subsequently approved. On 1 June 1995, you were 
discharged from the Navy with an other than honorable characterization of service. 

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. The 
Board considered your request for an upgrade to your discharge characterization and noted your 
personal statement in which you ask that the Board consider that for six years you performed 
your duty to the best ofyour ability. Your personal statement also notes that near the start of 
your second enlistment, you requested a transfer to . Your life began to decline in 
due to increased drinking, depression, and then marijuana use. You were arrested by 
civilian authorities while you were on leave and confined in November 1993. Although you 
returned to full duty following your civilian incarceration, your marital struggles impacted your 
ability to continue performing up to the expected standards. When making its determination, the 
Board considered that you cared for your sickly father following your release from active duty, 
and that your life is on a positive trajectory. You ask for an upgrade to your characterization of 
service so that you are able to qualify for certain veterans benefits and purchase a home. 

The Board, in its review ofyour entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially 
mitigating factors, such as your current post-service actions ofattending drug counseling 
sessions and joining your local electricians union. The Board found that these factors were not 
sufficient to warrant recharacterization ofyour discharge given the seriousness ofyour 
misconduct following your civilian conviction and incarceration. Accordingly, your application 
has been denied. 

It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that favorable action cannot be taken 
at this time. You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon the submission of 
new and material evidence. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board. 
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