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

			TJR
										  Docket No: 4683-07 
										  28 February 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 27 February 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 Navy on 23 June 1983 at age 18 and served without di~cip1inary incident until 2 July 1986, when you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for disrespect and disobedience. The punishment imposed was a reduction in paygrade and extra duty for 45 days. On 18 December 1986 you received NJP for obtaining services under false pretenses and were awarded a reduction in paygrade and restriction for 30 days.

Subsequently, you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of misconduct due to Commission of a serious offense. After consulting with legal counsel, you elected to present your case to an administrative discharge board (ADB). An ADB recommended separation under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense. Your commanding officer also recommended separation under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct as evidenced by two NJPs, multiple counsellings, and substandard performance. The discharge authority approved these recommendations
and directed an other than honorable discharge, and on 10 June 1987, 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, 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, multiple counsellings, and substandard performance. Finally, 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