DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 2O37O~5 100

			TJR
										Docket No: 1655-07 
										5 December 2007

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 4 December 2007. 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 reenlisted in the Navy on 2 December 1988 after three years of prior honorable service. You continued to serve without disciplinary incident until 15 February 1991, when you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for absence from your appointed place of duty. The punishment imposed was extra duty for 10 days and a suspended forfeiture of pay. On 10 December 1991 you were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of eight periods of absence from your appointed place of duty, three specifications of failure to pay just debts in the amount of $6,847.22, and three specifications of dishonorably writing checks with insufficient funds. You were sentenced to a $502 forfeiture of pay, reduction to paygrade E-l, and confinement for one month.

Subsequently, you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense. At that time you waived your right to consult with legal counsel and to present your case to an administrative
discharge board (ADB). On 20 December 1991 your commanding officer recommended an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense. On 3 January 1992 the discharge authority approved this recommendation and directed an other than honorable discharge, and on 15 January 1992 you were so discharged and assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code.

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your prior honorable service, period of good service, post service conduct, and assertion of personal, marital, and financial hardships. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge or a change of the narrative reason for separation because of the seriousness of your repetitive misconduct, which resulted in NJP and a court-martial conviction. Finally, you were given an opportunity to defend yourself, but waived your procedural right to present your case to an ADB. 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