DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 
Docket No: 4180-17 
OCT 09 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 of limitations and consider your application on its merits. A three­member panel ofthe Board for Correction ofNaval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 June 2017. 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 ofyour application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. 

You reenlisted in the Navy on 13 February 2002. On 21March2003, you were arrested by civilian authorities for inflicting corporal injury upon your spouse. You were arrested again on 31 March 2003 for battery with serious bodily injury on a Navy service member. 
Subsequently, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason ofmisconduct due to commission ofa serious offense. After you waived your procedural rights, your Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable (OTH) conditions by reason of misconduct due to commission ofa serious offense. The discharge authority approved this recommendation and directed separation under OTH conditions by reason of misconduct due to commission ofa serious offense. On 16 May 2003, you were so discharged. At that time, you were assigned an RE-4 (not recommended for reenlistment) reentry code. In this regard, you were assigned the most appropriate reentry code based on your circumstances. 

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. The Board, in its review ofyour entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors and your desire to serve in the military again. The Board also considered your JMP Docket No: 4180-1 7 
contention that your discharge was based on a one-time incident involving an assault after you caught your spouse and another person in an act of infidelity. The Board considered your parents' statements in support of your contention it was a one-time incident. 
Additionally, the Board considered your contention that you have not been in any trouble since your separation from the service. The Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant relief in your case given the seriousness of your misconduct. In this regard, the Board concluded the severity of your misconduct outweighed your desire to upgrade your discharge and reentry code and clearly supported the Commanding Officer's decision to issue you an OTH discharge and RE-4 reentry code. The Board also noted your DD Fonn 214 indicates you were properly 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. Fi naily, there is no provision of federal law or in Navy regulations that allows for a discharge upgrade, recharacterization of service, or a change in a reentry code due solely to the passage oftime. Accordingly, your application has been denied. 

It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that favorable action cannot be taken at this time. You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon the submission of new and material evidence. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board. 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 of probable material error or injustice. 

Sincerely, 

Executive Director