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

FC
										     Docket No: 1249-04 
										     2 August 2004

This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10 of the 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 28 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 that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish. the existence probable  treat~ error 0

The Board found that you enlisted in the Navy on 13 October 1993 at age 18. You served without disciplinary incident until 4 May 1994, when you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for two brief periods of unauthorized absence (UA) . You were awarded a forfeiture of pay, restriction, and extra duty. On 27 April 1994 you returned from a 17-day period of UA. There is nothing in the record to show that any disciplinary action was taken for this period UA.

On 1 May 1995 you were apprehended by civil authorities after a 242-day period of UA. On 21 July 1995 you were convicted by special court martial (SPCM) of the 242-day period of UA. The sentence included a bad conduct discharge (BCD). After appellate review was completed, on 19 September 1996 you were separated with a BCD.

In its review of your case, the Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors such as your youth, the length of time that has passed since you were discharged from the Navy, and your post service conduct. However, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of your lengthy period of unauthorized absence of more than eight months. 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 PFEIFFER
Executive Director

2