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 NAW ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
CRS
Docket No: 2111-99
24 June 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.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 16 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, 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 reenlisted in the Navy on 5 November
1963 after more than three years of prior active service. Prior
to the offenses for which you received the bad conduct discharge,
you were convicted by a special court-martial of an unauthorized
absence of 14 days.
A general court-martial convened on 25 September 1968 and found
you guilty of an unauthorized absence of 7+3 days and failure to
obey a lawful order. The court sentenced ou to confinement at
hard labor for four months, forfeiture of 11 pay and allowances,
and a bad conduct discharge. You received the bad conduct
discharge on 7 January 1969.
On 31 October 1975 you were issued a clemency discharge based
upon your completion of alternative service. In this regard,
Presidential Proclamation 4313 of 16 Septe*ber 1974 provided for
voluntary alternative service under the auspices of the
Iiecolullliition service Program, Selective Service System, for a
specified period. Upon successful completion of the alternative
service, former servicemembers were granted a clemency discharge
by the President of the United States. This restored civil
rights, although not veterans rights or benefits.
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 the fact that your unauthorized absences totalled about 26
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
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 00186-99
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 | CY1998 | 08793-98
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 | 03188-98
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. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1998 | 04002-98
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. 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 | CY1998 | 04850-98
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 | 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 | CY2014 | NR3481 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 March 2015. 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 | 01398-99
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 July 1999. The Board concluded that the foregoing factors and contentions were insufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your record of an NJP, conviction by a summary court-martial and the conviction by general court-martial of an AWOL of more than six months during wartime. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 00169-99
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Na-1 Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 May 1999. The Board concluded that the foregoing factor and contention were insufficient to warrant recharacterizaton of your discharge given your record of two NJPs and a conviction by a special court-martial in only 14 months of service. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2000 | 03431-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 March 2001. 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 applicdnt to demonstrate the existence of probable...