DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEA
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TIR
Docket No: 5753-09
24 May 2010
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 18 May 2010. The names and votes of the members
of the panel will be furnished upon request. Your allegations
of error and iniustice 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.
You enlisted in the Marine Corps on 15 September 1952 at age 17.
You served without disciplinary incident until 19 May 1953, when
you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for misbehavior as a
sentinel. The punishment imposed was restriction for 14 days.
On 11 June 1954 you were convicted by general court-martial (GCM)
of intent to commit fraud and forgery. You were sentenced to
confinement at hard labor for two years, forfeiture of all pay
and allowances, reduction to paygrade E-1, and a dishonorable
d@ischarge (DD). On 17 December 1954 you submitted a written
request for restoration to duty, reduction of confinement, or an
honorable discharge. On 17 August 1955 this request was denied
in part. As such, on 21 September 1955, the DD was mitigated to
a bad conduct discharge (BCD) and the confinement was reduced to
20 months. Subsequently, the BCD was approved at all leveis of
review and on 14 October 1955 you were 50 discharged.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth and desire to upgrade your discharge. It also
considered your assertion that your discharge, being based on one
-isolated incident, was unjust. Nevertheless, these factors were
not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge
because of the seriousness of your misconduct. Finally, there is
documented evidence in the record that is contrary to your
assertion. Accordingly, your application has been denied.
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,
\o\ Don
W. DEAN P
Executive D r
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 10747-09
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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 05183-03
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.You enlisted in the Marine Corps on 8 December 1952 at age 17. On 23 November 1953 you received...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05378-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 March 2011. 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. 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 | CY2006 | 01731-06
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 September 2006. 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 ecord, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 10000-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 January 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03313-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 October 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. On 31 August 1954 you received NJP for failure to The punishment imposed was The punishment imposed was 14 days of that On 14 September 1954, you were convicted by summary martial of breaking restriction. convicted of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 06283-06
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.You enlisted in the Marine Corps on 28 November 1953 at age 17 and served without disciplinary...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03152-01
your application, thereof, your naval record, and policies. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of together with all material submitted in support and applicable statutes, regulations, A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 February 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this After careful and...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 03750-07
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. You were sentenced to confinement for 16 days. 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 | CY2001 | 01808-00
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. September 1955 you requested immediate execution of the BCD. 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.