DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 

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

Docket No: 425-16 
JAN 03 2017 

Dear : 

This is in reference to your application for correction ofyour naval record pursuant to the 
provisions oftitle 10, 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 three-member panel of the Board for Correction ofNaval Records, sitting in executive session, 
considered your application on 8 September 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 of probable material error or injustice. 

You enlisted in the Navy, began a period ofactive duty on 5 August 1987, and served for one year 
without disciplinary incident. On 17 August 1988, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for 
an unauthorized absence (UA). On 24 October 1988, you were counseled for another UA. On 30 
August 1989, you were convicted by summary court-martial for two specifications ofUA totaling 41 
days. 

Subsequently, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason ofmisconduct due to 
commission of a serious offense. After you waived your procedural rights,.your commanding officer 
recommended discharge under other than honorable (OTH) conditions by reason ofmisconduct due 
to commission of a serious offense. The discharge authority approved this recommendation and 
directed separation under other than honorable conditions by reason ofmisconduct due to 
commission of a serious offense. On 26 October 1989, you were so discharged. 

The Board, in its review ofyour entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially 
mitigating factors such as your desire to upgrade your discharge and contention that, due to your 
circumstances, you were given the impression you were receiving a hardship discharge. 
Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant relief in your case 
given the seriousness ofyour misconduct In this regard, the Board concluded the severity ofyour 
misconduct outweighed your desire to upgrade your discharge and clearly supported the 
commanding officer's decision to issue you an OTH discharge. The Board also noted your DD 
Form 214 indicates you were properly separated without an administrative board (ADB). By 
waiving your procedural right to present your case to an ADB, you gave up your first and best 
opportunity to advocate for retention or a more favorable characterization of service. Accordingly, 
your application has been denied. 

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 of new 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 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 ofprobable material error or injustice. 

Sincerely, 

Executive Director