DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTFON OF NAVAL RECORDS
				      2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

						 SJN
				 Docket No: 03803-06
                                            22 September 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 20 September 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 there of, 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 30 September 1977 at age 19. You served without incident until 31 August 1978, when you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for four specifications of unauthorized absence (UA) totaling about six days. Between the dates of 5 September 1978 and 9 March 1979, you were UA on three more occasions for a total of 174 days. The last UA, from 21 September 1978 to 9 March 1979, was terminated only by your apprehension.

It appears that you submitted a written request for a good of the service discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for these three UA’s. Prior to submitting this request for discharge, you would have conferred with a qualified military lawyer, been advised of your rights, and warned of the probable adverse consequences of accepting such a discharge.

It also appears that your request for discharge was granted since you received an other than honorable discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court—martial on 20 April 1979. As a result of this action, you were spared the stigma of a court-martial conviction and the potential penalties of a punitive discharge and confinement at hard labor.

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and time in service. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of your UA’s totaling about six months, the last of which was terminated by apprehension, and especially your request for discharge to avoid trial for those periods of absence. The Board believed that considerable clemency was extended to you when your request for discharge was approved since, by this action, you escaped the possibility of confinement at hard labor and a punitive discharge. The Board also concluded that you received the benefit of your bargain with the Navy when your request for discharge was granted and should not be permitted to change it now. 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