DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 
 
Docket No: 592-16 
JAN 03 2017 

Dear 

This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the 
proyisions 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 20 September 2016. The names and votes ofthe members ofthe 
panel will be furnished upon request. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in 
accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this 
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 and began a period ofactive duty on 11 December 1990. During the 
period from 28 February to 17 April 1992, you received two Non-Judicial Punishments (NJP) for 
two specifications ofdisorderly conduct, damage to government properly, assault, and 
disobeying a lawful order. On 23 April 1992, you were subsequently notified ofpending 
administrative separation action by reason ofmisconduct due to commission ofa serious offense. 
After you waived your procedural rights, your commanding officer recommended an other than 
honorable (OTH) discharge by reason of misconduct due to commission ofa serious offense. On 
25 July 1992, your were convicted by civil authorities for being drunk in public. On 31 July 
1992, you received NJP for disorderly conduct and underage drinking. As a result ofthe 
forgoing, the discharge authority approved your commanding officer's recommendation and 
directed separation under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct. On 
16 September 1992, you were so discharged. 

The Board, in its review ofyour entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially 
mitigating factors, such as your character letters, post service conduct, Internal Revenue Service 
transcripts, your desire to upgrade your discharge, change narrative reason, change RE-4 reentry 
code, reinstatement ofrank, and assertion that you were not notified of your procedural rights, 
provided legal counsel, denied to appear before an Administrative Discharge Board (ADB), and 
family problems affected your service. Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these factors 
were not sufficient to warrant relief in your case given your misconduct. In this regard, the 
Board concluded the severity of your misconduct, which resulted in three NJPs and a civil 
conviction, outweighed your desire to upgrade your discharge. 

In regard to your assertion that you were not notified ofyour procedural rights, provided legal 
counsel, and denied to appear before an Administrative Discharge Board (ADB). The record 
clearly shows you waived your rights to consult counsel, submit a statement, or to have an 
administrative discharge board (ADB) which was your chance for retention, and your 
opportunity to advocate for a better discharge. The record also shows that on two separate 
occasions, you elected an ADB but changed your decision and decided against the ADB. The 
Board also was not persuaded by the unsubstantiated assertion that family problems affected 
your service. There is no evidence in the record, and you provided none, to support your 
assertion. 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 ofnew and material 
evidence within one year from the date of the 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 ofan official naval record, the burden is on the 
applicant to demonstrate the existence ofprobable material error or injustice. 

Sincerely, 

Executive Director