DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 2O37O~5 100

TJR
Docket No: 1116-07
5 December 2007

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 4 December 2007. 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 reenlisted in the Marine Corps on 12 May 1987 after four years of prior honorable service. You continued to serve without disciplinary incident until 16 October 1987, when you received nonjudicial. punishment (NJP) for the loss of government property.

On 25 August 1989 you received NJP for absence from your appointed place of duty and failure to obey a lawful order. The punishment imposed was a $200 forfeiture of pay, restriction and extra duty for 30 days, and reduction to paygrade E—3. The extra duty, restriction, and reduction were suspended for six months. However, on 9 November 1989, this suspended punishment was vacated due to your continued misconduct. On 19 December 1989 you received your third NJP for four specifications of breaking restriction and were awarded a $600 forfeiture of pay, extra duty and restriction for 30 days, and reduction to paygrade E-2.  On 22 January 1990 you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. At that time you waived your right to consult with legal counsel and to present your case to an administrative discharge board (ADB). On 26 January 1990 your commanding officer recommended an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. On 13 February 1990 the discharge authority approved this recommendation and directed an other than honorable discharge, and on 20 April 1990 you were so discharged.

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and desire to upgrade your discharge. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of the seriousness of your repetitive misconduct, which resulted in three NJPs. Finally, you were given an opportunity to defend yourself, but waived your procedural right to present your case to an ADB. 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