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

SMW
Docket No: 9416-07
19 June 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 18 June 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 27 October 1952, you enlisted in the Navy at age 17 with parental consent. During the period 27 April to 17 September 1953, you had nonjudicial punishment and were convicted by a summary and special court-martial (SPCM) . Your offenses included oversleeping, having possession of and wearing another person’s apparel, disrespect, disobedience of a lawful order, and a 23 day period of unauthorized absence (UA). On
29 October 1953, you were convicted by a SPCM of a 16 day period of UA. Your sentence included forfeitures of pay, confinement, reduction in rank, and a bad conduct discharge (BCD), but the BCD was subsequently suspended.

On 6 January 1954, your commanding officer initiated administrative separation by reason of unfitness. In connection with this processing you acknowledged that separation could result in an undesirable discharge (UD) and did not submit a statement. An administrative discharge board
subsequently considered your case and agreed with the discharge recommendation. On 11 February 1954, the separation authority approved the discharge recommendation and directed a UD by reason of unfitness. On 26 February 1954, 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 the seriousness of your misconduct. 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