DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

TJR
Docket No: 7480-03
3 August 2004

This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10, United States Code, Section 1552.

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 July 2004. 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 of your 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 of probable material error or injustice.

You enlisted in the Navy on 5 April 1944 at age lb and served without disciplinary incident until 7 October 1944, when you were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of absence from your appointed place of duty, being outside of military limits, and a 12 day period of unauthorized absence (UA). You were sentenced to confinement on bread and water for 10 days and a $54 forfeiture of pay.

On 15 March and again on 7 May 1945 you were convicted by SCM of two periods of UA totalling 35 days.

On 28 June 1946, at the expiration of your enlistment, you were issued a general discharge.

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and assertion that you were discharged under unusual
circumstances. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of your repetitive misconduct, which resulted in three court-martial convictions. Accordingly, your application has been denied.

		The names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.

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 or other matter not previously considered by the Board. 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 of probable material error or injustice.

Sincerely,

	W. DEAN PFIEFFER
Executive Director

2