DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
FC
Docket No:
16 June 20C
0669-03
This is in reference to your application on behalf of yo
husband for correction of his naval record pursuant to t
provisions of Title 10 of the United States Code section
r late
e
1552.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Nava
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 11 June 2003.
Your allegations of error
injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrativ
regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings
Board.
Documentary material considered by the Board con
of your application, together with all material submitte
support thereof, your late husband's naval record and ap
statutes, regulations and policies.
i
nd
of this
isted
in
licable
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 record reflects that he received two
The Board found that your husband enlisted in the Navy on 13 June
1942.
punishments and was convicted on two occasions by two summary
court martials (SCM) of three periods of unauthorized absence
totaling about 13 days and possession of another man's
identification card and apparel.
be discharged with a bad conduct discharge
1943 he was so discharged.
sentencedihim to
His last SCM
(BCD) and on
nonjudicqal
$ January
On 10 May 1944 he was allowed reenlist in the Naval Reserve
despite his prior BCD, and commenced two years of active
During this enlistment, your husband was convicted by a deck
court (DC), four
periods of unauthorized absence totaling about eighty da
breaking arrest.
for six months.
Two of the
However, because of subsequent
SCMs, and a general court martial
SCMs sentenced him to
(GCM)
iduty.
~of five
absences, he was convicted by the GCM and sentenced'him
He was so discharged on 12 May 1946.
f
o a BCD.
the Board carefully weighed
In its review of your application,
all potentially mitigating factors such as his youth and
immaturity, the length of time that has passed since he was
discharged from the Navy, and his wartime service.
Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of either BCD given his frequent
absences and other misconduct.
has been denied.
panel will be furnished upon request.
The names and votes of the members of
Accordingly, your application
.:he
However, the
unau.:horized
It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are
that favorable action cannot be taken.
the Board reconsider its decision upon submission of new and
material evidence or other matter not previously
the Board.
a presumption of regularity attaches to all official
Consequently, when applying for a correction of an
naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the
existence of probable material error or injustice.
conside ed by
it is important to keep in m'nd that
You are entitled to
In this regard,
ret rds.
officl'al
1
uch
have
Sincerely,
W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04389-09
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all Material submitted in support thereof, your late husband’s naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. About six months later, on 8 January 1969, he received NUP for a nine day period of UA. 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 | CY1999 | Document scanned on Mon Sep 25 09_11_22 CDT 2000
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your late husband’s naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. received the BCD. He was sentenced to forfeitures totalling $234 and a About a month later, on 25 June 1945, he received CM On 23 October 1945 he At this The Board also considered your The Board, in its review of your late husband’s entire record and your application,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 02498-99
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your late husband's naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. At this time the BCD was ordered executed. The Board, in its review of your late husband's entire record and your application, carefully considered all mitigating factors, such as his youth and immaturity.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 03745-06
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your late husband’s 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.Your late husband enlisted in the Naval Reserve on 14 December 1942 at the age of 17. ...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00575-12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 November 2012. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your late husband's 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07888-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 July 2008. on 16 March 1946, your late husband The Board, in its review of your late husband's record and your application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, and your contention that he was discharged due to medical problems. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR466 13
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your late husband's 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 01099-99
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Na-1 Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 July 1999. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your husband's naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. On 23 April 1969 the commanding officer recommended your husband be issued an undesirable discharge by reason of unfitness.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00618-09
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your late husband's naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Subsequently, upon his return, on 19 February 1970, he submitted a request for an administrative discharge in order to avoid trial by another court-martial for the additional periods of UA. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01664-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 October 2009. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your late husband's 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...