Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY1998 | 08841-98
Original file (08841-98.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 

T JR 
Docket No:  8841-98 
15 July 1999 

. . 

Dear 

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 7 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 the evidence submitted was insufficient 
to establish the existence of probable material error or 
injustice. 

The Board found you enlisted in the Navy on 9 December 1952 at 
the age of 20.  Your record reflects that you served for nearly 
two years without disciplinary incident but on 23 December 1954 
you were convicted by  special court-martial  (SPCM) of assault. 
You were sentenced to confinement at hard labor for six months 
and forfeitures totalling $420. 

Your record further reflects that on 30 August 1955 you were 
again convicted by SPCM of assault and disrespect.  You were, 
sentenced to confinement at hard labor for six months and 
forfeitures totalling $468. 

On 28 November 1956, at the expiration of your enlistment, you 
were issued a general discharge.  At that time your average marks 
in conduct and proficiency were high enough to warrant an 
honorable discharge. 

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, 
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as 
your youth and immaturity, and the honorable discharge 
certificate you received from the National Guard.  The Board also 
considered your contention that the general discharge should be 
upgraded because it was unjust and erroneous.  Further, you state 
that you served your required 4-year term, never received 
quarterly marks under 3.0, were promoted to paygrade E-4, and 
never received a reduction in paygrade.  The Board noted your 
statement to the effect that draft dodgers and conscientious 
objectors received immunity or honorable discharges.  However, 
the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant 
recharacterization of your discharge given the serious nature of 
your misconduct which resulted in two court-martial convictions. 
Even though your conduct and proficiency averages were high 
enough for a fully honorable discharge, such a characterization 
was not authorized if an individual had been convicted by a 
general court-martial or more than one special court-martial 
during his/her current enlistment.  Since you were convicted by 
two special courts-martial, an honorable discharge was not 
authorized.  Given all the circumstances of your case, the Board 
concluded your discharge was proper 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. 

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 | NC9808841

    Original file (NC9808841.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 July 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. Since you were convicted by two special courts-martial, an honorable discharge was not authorized.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 03093-01

    Original file (03093-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    3093-01 15 October 2001 Dear 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. considered your application on Your allegations of error and injustice were A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Navy Records, sitting in executive session, 11 October 2001. reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. The fact...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1998 | 07383-98

    Original file (07383-98.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 August 1999. The Board concluded that the foregoing factors and contentions were insufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your record of two NJPs, three summary courts-martial convictions, and a special court-martial conviction. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07620-02

    Original file (07620-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 May 2003. 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 | 07460-98

    Original file (07460-98.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 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. Given all the circumstances of your case the.Board concluded your discharge was proper as issued and no change is warranted.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 09219-02

    Original file (09219-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 April 2003. 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. On 4 June 1957, you received a third NJP for disorderly conduct, and were awarded reduction to paygrade E-1.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 11227-07

    Original file (11227-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 November 2008. 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, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 10343-02

    Original file (10343-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 September 2003. 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. On 26 October 1966 you were convicted by SPCM of a 67 day period of UA and were sentenced to confinement at hard labor for six months, a $342...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08034-08

    Original file (08034-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 June 2009. 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. About six months later, on 30 December 1966 you received NUP for a four day period of unauthorized absence (UA) and disorderly conduct.

  • 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.