DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
		2 NAVY ANNEX	
		WASHINGTON DC 2O37O-5100

TJR
Docket No: 9595-07
3 June 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 3 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.

You enlisted in the Marine Corps on 21 December 1966 at age 17. About eight months later, on 25 August 1967, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for absence from your appointed place of duty. The punishment imposed was restriction for 14 days.

During the period from 2 March to 6 October 1969 you received NJP on three more occasions for four periods of unauthorized absence (tJA) totalling 70 days. On 7 November 1969 you were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of a one day period of UA and sentenced to reduction to paygrade E-l, restriction for 30 days, and extra duty for 14 days. Shortly thereafter, on 12 December 1969, you received your fifth NJP for being incapacitated for duty and were awarded restriction for 14 days.

On 1 March 1970 you began another period of UA that was not terminated until 28 April 1970, and during this period of UA you were declared a deserter. As a result, you were referred for trial by special court-martial (SPCM). On 16 June 1970 you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of unfitness. After consulting with legal counsel, you waived your right to present your case to an administrative discharge board (ADB). On 24 June 1970 your commanding officer recommended separation under other than honorable conditions by reason
of unfitness due to continuous periods of tJA, a bad attitude toward the Marine Corps, an history of substandard performance and conduct with no rehabilitation potential, five NJPs, a SCM, and a pending SPCM for a lengthy period of UA. On 16 July 1970 the discharge authority approved this recommendation and directed an other than honorable discharge by reason of unfitness, and on 23 July 1970, you were so separated.

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, combat service, awards and medals, and the character reference letters submitted in support of your case. It also considered your assertion that your misconduct was the result of heavy drinking and guilt. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterizatjon of your discharge because of the seriousness of your repetitive misconduct, which resulted in five NJPs, a court-martial conviction, and repetitive and lengthy periods of UA. Finally, alcohol abuse is not an excuse for misconduct, and disciplinary action and administrative separation are appropriate for alcohol related offenses. 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