DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
	WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
		CRS
Docket No: 5629-04
23 April 2005

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 16 March 2005. 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 of probable material error or injustice.

The Board found that you enlisted in the Marine Corps on 24 January 1968. The record reflects that on 23 October 1968 you received nonjudicial punishment for an unauthorized absence (UA) of 15 days. The punishment consisted of a reduction in rate. Subsequently, on 7 February 1971 you were honorably separated and transferred to the Marine Corps Reserve. Your DD Form 214 correctly shows the 15 days of UA.

In your application, you state that if the 15 days of lost time is removed, your length of service for retirement from the Post Office will be increased. However, in the absence of any evidence to the contrary, the Board concluded that the commanding officer acted reasonably in concluding that you committed the offense and nonjudicial punishment was appropriate. 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