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

SMW
Docket No: 6075-O7
25 February 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 for Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 February 2008. Your allegations at 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 25 April 1986, you reenlisted in the Marine Corps at age 24 after prior periods of honorable service in the Marine Corps and Marine Corps Reserve, On 8 June 1988, you had nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for failure to go to your appointed place of duty. On 26 January 1989, you were counseled regarding deficiencies in the performance of your duties, tardiness, and unauthorized absence (tJA). On 23 February 1989, you had NJP for a two day period of UA and disobedience of a lawful order, On 8 August 1989, you began a UA that ended on 9 March 1990, a period of about 215 days. On 2 May 1990, you were convicted by a summary court-martial of the 215 day period of UA.

On 8 May 1990, your commanding officer initiated administrative separation by reason of misconduct due to minor disciplinary infractions. In connection with this processing you acknowledged that separation could result in an other than honorable (0TH) discharge and waived the right to have your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB). On 6 July 1990, the separation authority approved the discharge recommendation and
directed an 0TH discharge by reason of misconduct due to minor disciplinary infractions, On 11 July 1990, you were so discharged.

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potential mitigation, such as your prior honorable service. Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge due to the seriousness of your misconduct, especially, the 215 day period of UA. Finally, the Board noted that you waived the right to have your case heard by an ADB, your best opportunity for retention or a more favorable characterization of service. 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.

The Board noted that as a result of your prior honorable service, you may be eligible for veterans’ benefits. You should contact the nearest office of the Department of Veterans Affairs if you desire clarification about your eligibility for those benefits.

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

2