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

			TRG
	Docket No: 8354—07
	28 May 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 20 May 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.

You enlisted in the Navy on 28 October 1953 at age 17. During the period from 26 August 1954 to 2 August 1956, you were convicted by a special court-martial, two summary courts-martial and received six nonjudicial punishments. Your offenses were three periods of unauthorized absence totaling about 12 days, negligence, insolence, disobedience and four instances of dereliction in the performance of your duties.

Based on the foregoing record, you were processed for an administrative discharge. After review, the discharge authority directed an undesirable discharge and you were so discharged on 2 November 1956.

In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, limited education and your contention that you have been gainfully employed for over 50 years. The Board found that these factors and contention were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given the frequency of your misconduct, which suggested to the Board that your actions were deliberate. 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