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

SMW
Docket No: 7221-07
3 April 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 2 April 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 the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.

On 4 May 1988, you enlisted in the Navy at age 23.
On 23 August 1988, you had nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for breach of the peace. You were also counseled regarding deficiencies in your performance and conduct and warned that further infractions could result in disciplinary action or administrative separation. During the period 15 October 1988 to 30 January 1989, you were in an unauthorized absence (UA) status on three occasions totaling about 11 days. On 1 March 1989, you were counseled regarding deficiencies in your performance and conduct and warned that further infractions could result in disciplinary action or administrative separation. On 10 March 1989, you were convicted by a summary court-martial of three instances of tJA totaling 11 days and disobedience of a lawful order. During the period 20 to 31 May 1989, you were in a UA status on two more occasions totaling about six days. On 18 July 1989, you
had NJP for the two periods of UA totaling six days and disobedience of a lawful order.

On 18 July 1989, your commanding officer initiated administrative separation by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and commission of a serious offense. In connection with this processing, you acknowledged that separation could result in an other than honorable (0TH) discharge and waived the right to have your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB). On 29 July 1989, the separation authority approved the separation recommendation and directed an 0TH discharge by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. On 11 September 1989, you were so discharged.

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potential mitigation, such as your youth. Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge due to your misconduct that continued even after you were counseled regarding deficiencies in your performance and conduct and warned that further infractions could result in administrative separation. Finally, the Board noted that you waived the right to have your case heard by an ADB, your best opportunity for retention or a more favorable characterization of service. Therefore, 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