DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 

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

Docket No: 730-16 
JAN 03 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 20 September 2016. The names and votes ofthe members of the 
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 of your application, together 
with all material submitted in support thereo±: 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 reenlisted in the Navy on 16 November 1982 and continued to serve without disciplinary 
incident. On 29 April 1983, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for unauthorized 
absence (UA) for four days, failure to obey a lawful order, and two specifications ofbeing absent 
from your appointed place ofduty. On 3 January 1984, you were convicted by civil authorities 
of attempted murder, kidnapping, robbery, two counts of forced oral copulation, and two counts 
of forcible rape. Subsequently, you were notified of pending administrative swaration action by 
reason ofmisconduct due to a civil conviction. You failed to respond to the notice ofprocessing 
and statement of awareness which resulted in you waiving your procedural rights. As a result of 
the forgoing, your Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable 
conditions (OTH) by reason ofmisconduct due to civil conviction. The discharge authority 
approved this recommendation and directed separation under OTH conditions by reason of 
misconduct. On 23January1985, 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 assertion that your 
discharge states OTH because ofyour inability to fulfill your military service obligation due to a 
civil commitment. Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these factors were not sufficient to 
warrant relief in your case given the seriousness of your misconduct in both the civil and military 
communities. In this regard, the Board concluded the severity ofyour civil conviction far 
outweighed your desire to upgrade your discharge. The Board also was not persuaded by the 
mitigating assertion that your discharge states OTH because of your inability to fulfill your 
military service obligation due to a civil commitment. The Board noted that a civil conviction 
does not constitute a civil commitment. The record clearly shows you failed to respond to the 
notice of processing and statement ofawareness which would have provided you a clear 
understanding of your OTH discharge. 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 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