DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR  CORRECTION  NAVAL RECORDS
		WASHINGTON DC 2O37O~51OO	

			TRG
			Docket No:9439-07
	4 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 28 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 Marine Corps on 16 August 1972 for two years at age 22 after about six months of service in the Marine Corps Reserve. During the period from 1 August 1972 to 28 February 1974 you received nonjudicial punishment and were convicted by a summary court-martial. Your offenses were an unauthorized absence of about seven days and an absence from your appointed place of duty.

A general court-martial convened on 30 September 1974 and convicted you of assault with intent to inflict grievous bodily harm. The court sentenced you to confinement at hard labor for three years, forfeitures of all pay and allowances and a bad conduct discharge. However, the confinement in excess of 15 months was suspended. The bad conduct discharge was issued on 28 November 1975.

In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, limited education and your contention that the discharge for an isolated offense was unjust since you were so close to completing your two year enlistment. The Board found that these factors and contention were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your conviction by a general court-martial of a serious offense. 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 PFIEFFER
Executive Director