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

TJR
Docket No: 8162-07
2 April 2008

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 1 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.

You enlisted in the Naval Reserve on 28 December 1979 at age 20 and began a period of active duty on 18 March 1 980. You served without disciplinary incident until 28 July 1981, when you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for a 19 day period of unauthorized absence (UA), absence from your appointed place of duty, and failure to obey a lawful order. The punishment imposed was a $150 forfeiture of pay and reduction to paygrade E-2. The next day, on 29 July 1981 you began another period of UA.

During April and May of 1983, while in a UA status, you were apprehended by civil authorities. As a result, on 15 June 1983, you were convicted of two counts of forgery, three counts of uttering forged instruments, eight counts of theft by deception, and eight counts of receiving stolen goods. You were sentenced to confinement for no less than six months, but not to exceed 23 months. Your sentence also included special provisions for drug rehabilitation.

On 13 September 1983, while in the custody of civil authorities, you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of misconduct due to a serious offense as evidenced by civil conviction. At that time you waived your right to consult with legal counsel and to present your case to an administrative discharge board (ADB). Subsequently, your commanding officer recommended an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct due to a serious offense. On 28 November 1983 the discharge authority approved this recommendation and directed an other than honorable discharge, and on 7 December 1983, while in the custody of civil authorities, you were so discharged, thus ending an 886 day period of UA.

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, post service conduct, and the passage of time. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of the seriousness of your repetitive misconduct in both the civilian and military communities. Further, no discharge is automatically upgraded due solely to the passage of time or an individual’s good post service conduct. 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