DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD
X
2 NAVY ANNE
S
WASHINGTON DC 20370-510
0
ELP
Docket No. 6258-00
26 February 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.
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.
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 1948 for three years.
were advanced to PFC (E-2) and served without incident until
21 July 1948 when you were convicted by summary court-martial of
(UA) totalling about 16 days
two periods of unauthorized absence
and failure to obey a lawful regulation by exceeding the
limit on liberty.
and forfeitures of $45 pay per month for three months.
You were sentenced to 40 days of confinement
The record reflects that you
300-mile
19-month period from February 1949 to October 1951 you
During the
received three nonjudicial punishments
by a deck court.
Your offenses consisted of disrespect, two
periods of UA totalling about eight days, and having a dirty
rifle and an unsecured locker.
advanced to CPL (E-4) and your enlistment was involuntarily
extended for a period of 12 months.
During this period, you were also
(NJP) and were convicted
The DD Form 214 in the shows that you were honorably discharged
on 2 February 1952 by reason of expiration of enlistment.
However, you were issued a general discharge certificate.
Character of service is based, in part, on conduct and
proficiency averages which are computed from marks assigned
during periodic evaluations.
Your conduct and proficiency
averages were 3.4 and 5.7, respectively.
of 4.0 in conduct was required for a fully honorable characteri-
zation at the time of your discharge.
A minimum average mark
In its review of your application the Board conducted a-careful
search of your service record any mitigating factors which might
warrant changing your general discharge to fully honorable.
However, no justification for such a change could be found.
The Board noted your contention that you were never informed that
you were being issued a general discharge and your belief that it
The Board concluded that
was issued because of your going UA.
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.
erroneously shows you were discharged honorably rather than under
honorable conditions, you were properly issued a general
discharge certificate.
The fact that the DD Form 214 is
erroneous does not provide a compelling reason for changing the'
discharge certificate.
The Board thus concluded that that the
issuance of a general discharge certificate was proper and no
change is warranted.
Accordingly, your application has been
denied. The names and votes of the members of the panel will be
furnished upon request.
Although the DD Form 214
NJPs, convictions by
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
existence of probable material error or injustice.
the,
Sincerely,
W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 02621-03
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 August 2003. 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 | CY2013 | NR3300-13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 February 2014. On 8 July 1948, you were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of UA from your unit for a period of four days and: missing ‘ship's movement. The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed all potentiaily mitigating factors, such as your prior honorable service.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09257-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 November 2008. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your two SCM convictions, conviction by DC, involvement with civil authorities, and your failure to attain the conduct average required for an honorable discharge. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 10344-08
An average of 3.25 in conduct was required at the time of your separation for an honorable characterization of service. The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, -honorable post military service, and desire to... upgrade your.discharge..- Nevertheless, the Board concluded these. for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06972-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 April 2003. 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, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2004 | 01187-04
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 materialThe Board found that you enlisted in the Navy on 29 May 1946 at age 18. On 1 October 1948 you were convicted by deck...
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 | CY2002 | 03851-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 December 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. review, on 21 May 1948 you were so discharged. 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 | CY2007 | 10865-07
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. The Board found that these factors and contention were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given the frequency of your misconduct. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10865-07
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.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.You initially enlisted in the Navy on 2 September 1942 at age 17 and were honorably discharged on 6...