DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 

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

Docket No: 595-16 
 
Dear
 
This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the 
provisions ofTitle IO, 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 ofthe Board for Correction ofNaval Records, sitting in executive session, 
considered your application oil 22 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 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 of the entire record, the Board found the evidence 
submitted was insufficient to establish the existence ofprobable material error or injustice. 

You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on 2 July 1986. Between 1 April 1987 
and 8 July 1987, you received four separate nonjudicial punishments (NJP) for offenses including a 
3-day unauthorized absence (UA), disrespect, disobeying a lawfulorder, communicating a threat, 
malingering, and assault. On 14July1987, you were convicted at a summary court-martial (SCM) 
for disobeying a superior commissioned officer, disrespect, failing to obey a lawful order, and failing 
to go to your appointed place ofduty. 

Subsequently, administrative discharge action was initiated on 20 July 1987 by reason ofmisconduct 
due to a pattern ofmisconduct. After you waived your procedural rights, your Commanding Officer 
recommended discharge under other than honorable (OTH) conditions by reason ofmisconduct due 
to pattern ofmisconduct. The discharge authority approved this recommendation and directed 
separation under OTH conditions by reason ofmisconduct. While your separation was pending, on 
2 August 1987 you received yet another NJP. On 26 August 1987, you were discharged with an 
OTH characterization of service. 

The Board, in its review ofyour entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially 
mitigating factors such as your desire to obtain long term medical care from the VA, and your 
desire to upgrade your discharge. However, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient 
to warrant relief in your case given the seriousness ofyour pattern ofmisconduct. In this regard, 
the Board concluded the severity and pervasiveness of your misconduct clearly supported the 
Commanding Officer's decision to issue you an OTH discharge. The Board also noted that you 
were properly processed and separated without an administrative discharge 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 ofservice. 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 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 ofan official naval record, the burden is on the 
applicant to demonstrate the existence ofprobable material error or injustice. 

Sincerely, 


Executive Director