DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
	BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2NAVYANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 2O37O~51OO
	
	TRG
Docket No: 7106-06
14 March 2007

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 6 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 that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.

You enlisted in the Marine Corps on 5 January 1954 at age 18. on 13 May 1954, you received nonjudicial punishment for an unauthorized absence of about two days. On 7 September 1954 you began a period of unauthorized absence which lasted until you were apprehended on 1 October 1954, a period of about 24 days. During this period, you missed movement of your unit.

A special court-martial convened on 1 November 1954 and convicted you of an unauthorized absence of about 24 days and missing movement. The court sentenced you to forfeiture of $50 pay per month for six months, confinement at hard labor for six months and a bad conduct discharge. On 11 February 1955, you elected to waive your right to request restoration to duty. The bad conduct discharge was issued on 25 March 1955.

In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such a your youth, limited education and low score on the aptitude test. The Board found that these factors and contentions were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your court-martial conviction for serious military offenses. The Board concluded that the discharge was proper as issued and no change is warranted.

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