DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 2O37O-5100

	TJR
									Docket No: 10993-06 
									25 October 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 23 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 the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.

You enlisted in the Navy on 19 April 1990 at age 19 and served for a year and five months without disciplinary incident, but on 25 September 1991 you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for failure to go to your appointed place of duty and dereliction of duty. The punishment imposed was restriction and extra duty for 45 days, a $400 forfeiture of pay, and reduction to paygrade E-l.

On 18 February and again on 27 March 1992 you received NJP for disorderly conduct and six specifications of failure to go to your appointed place of duty. On 28 March 1992 you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. At that time you waived your right to consult with legal counsel and to present your case to an administrative discharge board (AIDE). On 29 March 1992 your commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct as evidenced by three NJP5. On 4 April 1992 the discharge authority directed separation under other than honorable conditions, and on 15 April 1992 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 and desire to upgrade your discharge. It also considered your assertion that you experienced troubles trying to adjust to military life. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of the seriousness of your repetitive misconduct. Finally, you were given an opportunity to defend yourself, but elected to waive your procedural rights to present your case to an ADB. 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