DEPARTM ENT OF THE NAVY
		BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
				2 NAVY ANNEX

		TRG
		Docket No: 9069-06
		29 February 2008

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 26 February 2008. 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.

The record shows that you have honorable service from 13 September 1994 to 12 September 1998. Subsequently, you reenlisted in the Navy on 17 May 2001 at age 26. On 27 July 2001 you received nonjudicial punishment for an unauthorized absence of about 52 days, disobedience and disrespect.

Based on the foregoing record, you were processed for an administrative discharge by reason of misconduct. In connection with this processing, you elected to waive the right to have your case heard by an administrative discharge board. After review, the discharge authority directed discharge under other than honorable conditions and you were so discharged on 5 September
2001.

In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your prior honorable service and your contention that a few months after your discharge you were diagnosed with a mental disorder. You believe that this disorder led to your difficulties in your second enlistment. The Board found that these factors and contentions were not sufficient to warrant recharacterizatjon of your discharge given your record of misconduct. There is no documentation in the record and you have submitted none to show
that you were not responsible for your actions while serving in the Navy. 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