DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TRG
Docket No: 7447-98
8 July 1999
nm
Dear Same.
This is in reference to your application for correction of your
late father's 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 of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 30 June 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, the case summary prepared in connection with the Board's
review of your late father case in 1950 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 was unable to obtain your father's service record from
the Federal Records Center in St. Louis, Missouri. Therefore,
the Board conducted its review based on information extracted
from the record at the time of the Board's initial review of your
father's case in 1950.
The available records show that your father enlisted in the Naval
Reserve on 20 April 1942 at age 21. On 10 January 1943 he was
convicted by a summary court-martial of and unauthorized absence
of about eight days. On 19 May 1943 he began a period of
unauthorized absence which lasted until 18 June 1943. On 30
November 1943 he was convicted by a general court-martial of the
foregoing period of unauthorized absence, totaling about 30 days,
and missing ship's movement. The court sentenced him to
reduction to apprentice seaman, forfeiture of all pay and
allowances, confinement at hard labor for four months and a bad
conduct discharge. The sentence was suspended for a probationary
period of six months and he was restored to duty On 24 January
1944. He violated his probation on 7 February 1944 when he began
a period of unauthorized absence which lasted until 25 May 1944,
a period of about 108 days. Subsequently, the suspended sentence
was ordered executed. He received the bad conduct discharge on 7
July 1944.
In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all
potentially mitigating factors, such as your late father's
statement concerning his service in World War II. The Board
found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of the bad conduct discharge given the
offenses which resulted in the sentence to the bad conduct
discharge, and especially his violation of probation with a
lengthy period of unauthorized absence. 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.
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
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11524-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 August 2011. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your late father’s 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1998 | NC9800999
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. Since you were only 16 years old, you requested discharge from the Naval Reserve.
NAVY | BCNR | CY1998 | 00999-98
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 | CY2008 | 08015-08
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with ail material submitted in support thereof, your late father’s naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of his discharge because of his repeated periods of UA during wartime, court-martial convictions which resulted in BCD, and his continued misconduct after being awarded a BCD. ...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02986-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 December 2008. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your late father's 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1998 | NC9805509
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 late brother's 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 01249-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 October 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. On 25 March 1945, you began another period of UA when you failed to comply with orders.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 09147-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 April 2011. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your late father’s naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. On 11 January 1950, he was convicted by a second SCM of an eight day period of UA and sentenced to a forfeiture of pay, and a bad...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08098-07
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your late father’s naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. On 18 March 1946 he was convicted by civil authorities of robbery and sentenced to an unspecified period of confinement. Consequently, 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 | CY2011 | 00152-11
R three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval, Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 July 2011. 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...