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

TJR
Docket No: 6398-06
16 March 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 13 March 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 enlisted in the Navy on 8 May 1972 at age 17. About eight months later, on 8 January 1973, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for a 25 da period of unauthorized absence (UA) and were awarded restriction for 45 days and a $342 forfeiture of pay.

During the period from 1 April 1974 to May 1987 you were in a UA status on five occasions for 5,026 days. Also during this period you were declared a deserter, and apprehended by civil authorities. As a result, on 12 May 1987, you were convicted by civil authorities of violating your parole by possession of narcotics and sentenced to confinement for three years.

Subsequently, you were processed for an administrative separation by reason of misconduct due to civil conviction, on 24 December 1987 the discharge authority directed an other than honorable discharge, and on 1 April 1988, while in the custody of civil authorities, 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, post service conduct, and the passage of time. It also considered the character reference letters submitted in support of your request to have your discharge upgraded. The Board further considered your assertion that your periods of UA were the result of a breach of contract. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of the seriousness of your repetitive and lengthy periods of UA from the Navy totalling nearly 15 years and included a conviction by civil authorities. Further, there is no evidence in the record, and you submitted none, to support your assertion of a breach of contract. Finally, no discharge is upgraded due solely to the passage of time or to an individual’s good post service 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

2