DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD
S
2 NAVY ANNE
X
WASHINGTON DC 20370-510
0
ELP
Docket No. 5355-01
19 November 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.
Your allegations of error and injustice were
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Navy Records,
sitting in executive session,
15 November 2001.
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.
considered your application on
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 Navy on 19 December 1950
for four years at age 18.
The record reflects that you were
advanced to TA (E-2) and served for only three months without
incident.
received two nonjudicial punishments (NJP) and were convicted by
a deck court and a summary court-martial.
consisted of a brief period of unauthorized absence (UA) of about
15 hours, two periods of UA totaling about 25 days, and failure
to muster.
During the two month period from March to May 1951 you
Your offenses
You were sentenced to confinement at hard labor for five
On 1 November 1951 you were convicted by general court-martial
of UA from 6 July to 10 September 1951, a period of about 67
days.
months, reduction in rate to TR (E-l), and a bad conduct
discharge.
sentence on 4 February 1952.
mended for restoration to duty.
The Navy Board of Review affirmed the findings and
Thereafter, you were not recom-
On 30 April 1952 you received a third NJP for two periods of UA
from 14-22 March and 29 March to 3 April 1952.
bad conduct discharge on 5 May 1952.
You received the
and the fact that it has been
The Board noted
However, the Board
NJPs and convictions by a deck court,
In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all
potentially mitigating factors such as your youth and immaturity,
limited education, low test scores,
more than 49 years since you were discharged.
your contention that the punishment was too severe for the
offense, and the outcome would have been different had you not
been so' naive and waived your appeal rights.
concluded that the foregoing factors and contentions were
insufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge
given your record of three
a summary court-martial and a general court-martial in only 17
months of service.
the 65 day period of UA of which you were convicted by general
court-martial was terminated only by your apprehension.
You
failed to learn from your earlier disciplinary actions and
continued your misconduct even after your general court-martial
conviction.
Your contention that the outcome would have been
different had you appealed is speculative at best and does not
provide a valid basis for recharacterization of service.
conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with
applicable law and regulations,
characterizes your service.
discharge was proper and no clemency is warranted.
your application has been denied. The names and votes of the
members of the panel will be furnished upon request.
and the discharge appropriately
The Board thus concluded that the
The Board noted the aggravating factor that
Your
Accordingly,
It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such
that favorable action cannot be taken.
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.
You are entitled to have
Sincerely,
W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director
2
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06258-00
A three-member panel for the Board for Correction of Navy Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 February 2001. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. your contentions were insufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your record of three a deck court and a summary court-martial, and failure to received the require average in conduct. ...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR8248 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 August 2014. 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 | CY2004 | 01128-04
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 injusticeThe Board found that you enlisted in the Navy on 25 July 1951 at age 17. On 7 February 1955 you...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00573-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 October 2010. 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. In this regard, *n RE-4 reenlistment code is required when an individual is discharged for misconduct and is not recommended for retention.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05541-01
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 served without further incident and received a general discharge upon the expiration of your enlistment on 15 September 1953. of 4.0 in conduct was required for a fully honorable characteri- zation of service at the time of your discharge.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 04568-06
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 31 October 2006. During the period from 10 June to 22 August 1953 you received two NJP’s for brief period of UA, missing restricted muster, disobedience, and failure to muster for hard labor. 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 | CY2009 | 11249-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 July 2010. 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 | CY2001 | 03224-01
material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, considered your application on Documentary regulations and policies. (UA) totaling about 9 days, two brief In December 1953, you were notified that you were being recommended for discharge by reason of unfitness. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00345-12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 September 2012. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 01086-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Navy Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 June 2001. The Board concluded that the foregoing factors and contention were insufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your conviction special court-martial of a two-month period of UA which was terminated only by your apprehension. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant...