DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD
X
2 NAVY ANNE
S
WASHINGTON DC 20370-510
0
CRS
Docket No: 4900-00
6 April 2001
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 4 April 2001.
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
Your allegations of error and
.
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 Marine Corps on 3
February 1956 at age 17.
nonjudicial punishment and a special court-martial.
included an unauthorized absence of 24 days and drunk and
disorderly conduct.
The record reflects that you received
The offenses
A second special court-martial convened on 21 January 1958'and
you were found guilty of unauthorized absences totalling 47 days
and breaking straggler's orders on two occasions.
sentenced you to confinement at hard labor for six months,
forfeitures of $28 per month for six months, and a bad conduct
You received the bad conduct discharge on 13 June
discharge.
1958.
The court
In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all
potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and
immaturity.
not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge
due to the fact that your unauthorized absences
However, the Board concluded that these factors were
totalled more
The Board also noted that during a period of
than two months.
about two years, you were the subject of three disciplinary
actions, including two convictions by special court-martial.
Based on the foregoing,
discharge is warranted.
denied.
furnished upon request.
the Board concluded that no change to the
Accordingly, your application has been
The names and votes of the members of the panel will be
It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that
You are entitled to have the
favorable action cannot be taken.
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 | CY2001 | 06348-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your Your allegations of error and application on 18 December 2001. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of Board. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07173-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your Your allegations of error and application on 18 December 2001. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of Board. not sufficient to warrant recharacerization of your discharge due totalled more than to the fact that your unauthorized...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07101-01
denied your request for a hardship discharge. On 30 June 1958 the Bureau of Naval Personnel On 11 A second special court-martial convened on 10 October 1958 and convicted you of an unauthorized absence of about 42 days, missing ship's movement and breaking arrest. Your request for a The Board Accordingly, your application has been denied.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04983-01
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. The Board noted your contention to the effect that marital problems and alcohol abuse were contributing factors in the prolonged period UA which led to your general court-martial conviction and bad conduct discharge. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2000 | 06666-00
A three-member panel for the Board for Correction of Navy 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. However, on 18 March 1959, you waived your right to request restoration to duty and requested that the bad conduct discharge be executed.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08116-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 January 2008. During your enlistment, you received four disciplinary actions for periods of unauthorized absence (UA) totaling more that five 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 | CY2002 | 10197-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 September 2003. imposed was reduction to On 11 March and again on 5 May 1959 you were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of two periods of unauthorized absence (UA) totalling three days and breaking restriction. January 1961 the discharge authority then directed an undesirable discharge by reason of unfitness due to frequent involvement of a discreditable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05560-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 31 October injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of Board. not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge due to.the fact that your unauthorized absences totalled nearly Accordingly, your Based on the foregoing,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06105-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 March 2011. About six months later, on 13 May 1957, you were convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) of a 38 day period of UA. The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your prior honorable service, belief that you received a bad conduct (BCD) or dishonorable (DD) discharge,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 00990-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 June 2001. serious offense of stealing from a Based on the foregoing, the Board concluded that no change to the discharge is warranted. 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.