DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
		BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
	WASHINGTON DC 20370-51 00 

						TJR
										Docket No: 7466-05 
										11 May 2006

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 9 May 2006. 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 7 September 1966 at age 17 and served for over a year without disciplinary incident, but on 10 October 1967 you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for an 18 day period of unauthorized absence (UA). Shortly thereafter, on 6 November 1967, you began another period of UA. While in a UA status you were apprehended by civil authorities, and on 28 April 1968 you were convicted of third degree burglary and sentenced to confinement for three years. However, the record reflects that the sentence was pending suspension.

On 13 September 1968 you were returned to military control, thus terminating a period of UA totalling 312 days. On 8 October 1968 the civil authorities suspended your 28 April 1968 sentence contingent upon your return to the Marine Corps with probation. On 17 October 1969 you were convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) of the foregoing period of UA and sentenced to a $390 forfeiture of pay, confinement at hard labor for six months, reduction to paygrade E-1, and a bad conduct discharge (BCD). However, the BCD was subsequently set aside on 27 December 1968.

On 4 March 1969 you began a period of UA that was not terminated
until you were apprehended by civil authorities on 27 May 1970.
At that time the suspension of the sentence imposed on 28 April
1968 was revoked.

While in confinement by civil authorities, you were processed for an administrative separation by reason of misconduct due to civil conviction. On 17 September 1970 your commanding officer recommended an undesirable discharge by reason of misconduct due to civil conviction. The discharge authority approved this recommendation and directed an undesirable discharge by reason of misconduct and on 25 November 1970 you were so separated.

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, post service conduct, and the passage of time. It also considered your request for an upgraded discharge so that you may obtain veterans’ benefits. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of the seriousness of your repetitive misconduct in both the military and civilian communities. 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