SJN
	Docket No: 07738-05 
		27 February 2006

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 23 February 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 20 February 1967 at age 19. on
1 October 1968 and 27 May 1969 you received nonjudicial
punishment (NJP) for two periods of unauthorized absence totaling
128 days and missing movement.

On 25 July 1969, you were released from active duty while serving in paygrade E-l and assigned and RE-4 reenlistment code. On 14 January 1972, after completion of your reserve obligation, you were awarded a general discharge and not recommended for reenlistment.

Characterization of service is based in part on conduct and proficiency averages computed from marks assigned on a periodic basis. Your conduct average was 2.6. At the time of your service, a conduct average of 3.0 was required for a fully honorable characterization of service.

The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant upgrading your discharge due to your record of misconduct consisting of two NJP’s for UA totaling over four
months, and your failure to attain the required average in conduct. 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