Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05428-01
Original file (05428-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD

S

2 NAVY ANNE

X

WASHINGTON DC 20370-510

0

TJR
Docket No: 5428-01
10 May 2002

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

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 7 May 2002.
injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative
regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this
Board.
your application,
thereof, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies.
Board was unable to obtain your naval record, and conducted its
review based on the documentation you submitted with your
application.

Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of
together with all material submitted in support

The

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.

The Board found you enlisted in the Navy on 6 April 1955 at the
age of 17.
Your case file reflects that on 30 January 1957 you
were convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) of three periods
of unauthorized absence (UA) totalling 19 days, absence from your
appointed place of duty,
paygrade E-l, confinement at hard
were sentenced to reduction to  
labor for six months, a $300 forfeiture of pay, and a bad conduct
discharge (BCD).
However, the BCD was suspended for six months.

and failure to obey a lawful order.

You

A year later, on 31 January 1958, you were convicted by SPCM of a
109 day period of UA.
You were sentenced to confinement at hard
labor for six months,
reduction to 
forfeiture of pay, and a BCD.
at all levels of review,
discharged.

The BCD was subsequently approved

and on 27 June 1958 you were so

paygrade E-l, a $390

told

review.of your case file and application,

The Board, in its 
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating   factors, such as
and your contention that you were
your youth and immaturity,
that your discharge would be upgraded six months after  your
The Board also considered your contentions that you
separation.
have been suffering with narcolepsy which resulted from a insect
However,
bite you received while serving in the Mediterranean.
the Board concluded these factors and contentions were not
sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge
because of your repetitive misconduct, especially, the lengthy
period of UA.
opportunity to receive a better characterization of service when
the BCD from the first SPCM was suspended, but your misconduct
continued.
passage of time.
submitted no evidence to support your contention of a  
connected medical condition, specifically, narcolepsy.
the Board concluded your
the circumstances in your case,
discharge was proper as issued and no change is warranted.
Accordingly, your application has been denied.

Also, no discharge is upgraded merely due to the

The Board noted that you were afforded the

Further, the Board noted that there you

service-

Given all

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
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



Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04806-99

    Original file (04806-99.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 June 2000. 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. months, reduction...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 10197-02

    Original file (10197-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | 08556-01

    Original file (08556-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 20 October 1960 you submitted a written request for 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.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 03114-11

    Original file (03114-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 January 2012. 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 late father’s naval record, and applicable statutes,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 03750-07

    Original file (03750-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2002 | 06645-01

    Original file (06645-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENTOFTHE NAVY BO ARD FOR CORRE CT ION OF N AV AL RECORD S 2 NAVY ANNE X WASHINGTON DC 20370-510 0 TJR Docket No: 6645-0 1 13 May 200 2 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. sitting in executive session, considered your A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, application on 7 May 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 02238-02

    Original file (02238-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 September 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. You were sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 30 days, to On 3 August 1960 you received nonjudicial a $40 forfeiture of pay, and reduction on 6 May 1960, you were paygrade E-l. On 27 August and again on 8 October...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05744-00

    Original file (05744-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 February 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 and applicable statutes, regulations, thereof, your naval record, and policies. immediate...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04154-01

    Original file (04154-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    months later, on 2 and 9 May 1967, you received NJP for a two day period of unauthorized absence (UA) and breaking restriction. Approximately five Your record further reflects that on 16 January 1968 you were convicted by SPCM of four periods of UA totalling 155 days. Board concluded these factors and contention were not sufficient to warrant a correction of your naval record given your seven periods of UA totalling 166 days and your three periods of confinement which that your...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 02379-02

    Original file (02379-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 October 2002. 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. January 1981 you...