Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY1998 | 03188-98
Original file (03188-98.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
D E P A R T M E N T  O F  T H E  N A V Y  
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 

2 N A W  ANNEX 

WASHINGTON DC  20370-5100 

CRS 
Docket No:  3188-98 
16 August 1999 

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. 

b 

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval 
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your 
application on 28 July 1999.  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. 

The Board found that you enlisted in the Marine Corps on 29 May 
1950 at age 17.  Your record reflects that you received three 
nonjudicial punishments and were convicted by two summary courts- 
martial.  The offenses included failure to obey a lawful order, 
unauthorized absences totalling four days, failure to have 
appropriate authorized car passes and a state operator's 
license. 

A special court-martial convened on 9 October 1953 and found you 
guilty of unauthorized absences totalling 81 days and breaking 
arrest.  The court sentenced you to confinement at hard labor for 
six months, forfeiture of $204, reduction in rate, and a bad 
conduct discharge.  You received the bad conduct discharge on 9 
March 1954. 

In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all 
potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and 
immaturity.  However, the Board concluded that these factors were 
not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge 

due to your six disciplinary actions, one of which was a special 
court-martial for absences totalling nearly three months.  Based 
on the foregoing, the Board concluded that no change to the 
discharge 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 PFEIFFER 
Executive Director 



Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1998 | 08793-98

    Original file (08793-98.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 April 1999. 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. However, the Board concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge due to l the serious theft...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1998 | 04850-98

    Original file (04850-98.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 August 1999. You received the bad conduct discharge on 15 July 1983. 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.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 00186-99

    Original file (00186-99.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    You were sentenced to confinement at hard labor for six months, forfeitures of $44 per month for six months, and a bad conduct discharge. On 25 March 1957 you waived your right to restoration to duty and requested execution of the bad conduct discharge. Thereafter, the Navy Board of Review approved only a finding that found you guilty of unauthorized absence from 28 December 1956 to 1 February 1957.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07212-02

    Original file (07212-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 January 2003. However, the Board concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge due to the fact that your unauthorized absences totalled more than six months. ~onsequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1998 | 00999-98

    Original file (00999-98.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. Apparently, no action was taken on your request for discharge because of the unauthorized absence and because even with the new date of birth, you would have been 17 years old on 11 July 1943. The Board found that these factors and contentions were not sufficient to warrant...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 01099-99

    Original file (01099-99.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Na-1 Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 July 1999. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your husband's naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. On 23 April 1969 the commanding officer recommended your husband be issued an undesirable discharge by reason of unfitness.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 01130-99

    Original file (01130-99.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 June 1999. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 02111-99

    Original file (02111-99.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 June 1999. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1998 | 04002-98

    Original file (04002-98.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. The Board found that these factors and contentions were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given the frequency of your misconduct and especially the last two periods of absences which resulted in the general court-martial conviction. Consequently, when applying...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 03573-99

    Original file (03573-99.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 September 1999. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...