DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 

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

Docket No: 00550-16 
JAN 27 2017 

Dear : 

This is inreference 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 of limitations and consider your application on itsnrerits. A threemember 
panel ofthe Board for Correction ofNaval Records, sitting in executive session, 
considered your application on 3 October 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 began a period of active duty in the Navy on 30 August 1976. You served over seven 
months without incident. On 19 April 1977, you were administratively counseled and notified 
that future misconduct could result in administrative discharge. On 6 June 1977, you received 
nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for three instances ofunauthorized absence, and received 
forfeiture ofpay and restriction. On 22 June 1977, you received a second NJP for wrongful 
possession ofanother's identification card, and for breaking international legal hold/restriction. 
On 15 September 1977, you received a third NJP for unauthorized absence, disobeying a lawful 
order, misbehavior ofa sentinel, and for possession of another's identification card, and received 
forfeiture ofpay and restriction. On 28 September 1977, you were notified ofadministrative 
separation proceedings on the basis offrequent involvement. Your commanding officer stated 
that you have been counseled and given the opportunity to correct your behavior, but you 
continue acting in a manner inconsistent with continued service. In response to the notification, 
you waived your right to appear before an administrative separation board in exchange for a 
general characterization ofservice. On 26 October 1977, you were discharged from the Navy 
with a general characterization ofservice. 

The Board considered your statement that you were involved in a civilian legal issue in , in the , 
that was resolved with no charges. Furthermore, the Board considered 
your statement that you did nothing wrong, as well as your contention that you were talked into 
accepting a general characterization of service. When making its determination, the Board noted 
that you were in the Navy for approximately 13 months at the time you received notification of 
administrative separation proceedings. 

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 your relative inexperience 
in the military at the time ofyour discharge. The Board found that these factors were not 
sufficient to warrant recharacterization ofyour discharge given your three NJPs in a 13 month 
period, and your commanding officer's recommendation for administrative separation. The 
Board noted that you elected to accept a general discharge rather than appear before an 
administrative separation board and risk receiving an Other Than Honorable characterization. 
The Board determined that based on your service record, three NJPs, and approximately one year 
ofduty, the general characterization ofservice was properly issued, and does not reflect an error 
or injustice. Accordingly, your application has been denied. 

It is regrettable 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 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