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

				CRS
										Docket No: 9877-06 
										26 October 2007

Dear

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 17 October 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.

The Board found that you enlisted in the Navy on 23 April 1986. You were absent without authority from 2 December 1986 to 16 June 1987 and from 25 July 1987 to 5 July 1988, a total of 504 days. On 30 August 1988 you were discharged under other than honorable conditions pursuant to your request for discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial for the unauthorized absence offenses.

In its review of your application the Board did not accept your unsubstantiated contention to the effect that you knew that a gun turret on your ship would explode at some time in the future which frightened you and caused you to become an unauthorized absentee on two occasions. The Board believed that considerable clemency was extended to you when your request for discharge to avoid trial by court-martial was approved, as you avoided the possibility of confinement at hard labor and a punitive discharge. Further, the Board concluded that you received the benefit of your bargain when your request for discharge was granted, and you should not be permitted to change it now. Therefore, the Board concluded that no change to the discharge 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