Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 01492-05
Original file (01492-05.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100


 SMW
 Docket No: 1492-05
24 August 2005




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 24 August 2005. 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 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.
You enlisted in the Naval Reserve on 2 December 1942 at age 17 with parental consent. The record shows that a period of illness from 22 to 30 September 1943 was considered time lost due to your own misconduct. During the period from 16 February 1944 to 2 February 1946 you received two captain’s masts and were convicted by two summary courts-martial (SCM) . Your offenses included creating a disturbance in the chow line; refusing to obey an order; assault; interfering with a military policeman in the execution of his duties; assault with intent to do bodily harm; assault with a dangerous weapon; use of abusive, obscene, and threatening language toward a superior officer in the execution of his duties; forcibly resisting arrest; refusing to obey an order from security police; use of obscene and profane language; attempting to strike a security police; and resisting arrest. On 19 March 1946 you were discharged under honorable conditions due to expiration of enlistment. Regulations in effect at the time of your discharge prohibited the issuance of an honorable discharge to individuals who had been convicted by more than one SCM. Therefore the two convictions by SCM precluded the issuance of an honorable discharge.


The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, your service on Guadalcanal during World War II, and your desire f or an honorable discharge. However, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your two SCM convictions and other misconduct. Therefore, the Board concluded that the discharge was proper as issued 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.
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 the existence of probable material error or injustice.


Sincerely,




W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 00142-03

    Original file (00142-03.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 October 2003. On 16 October 1980 an ADB recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct. 2 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 | 06286-01

    Original file (06286-01.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. You received the bad conduct discharge on 17 May 1971. 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 | CY2014 | NR7097 14_Redacted

    Original file (NR7097 14_Redacted.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 June 2015. 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 the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...

  • CG | BCMR | Discharge and Reenlistment Codes | 2003-096

    Original file (2003-096.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The General Counsel stated that the Board may upgrade a discharge if it is "adjudged to be unduly severe in light of contemporary standards,”(emphasis added) but, “the Board should not upgrade a discharge unless it is convinced, after having considered all the evidence [including changes in community mores, civilian as well as military, since the time of discharge, as well as post-service conduct, in addition to the applicant’s record], that in light of today’s standards, the discharge was...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03541-10

    Original file (03541-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 February 2011. 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 | CY2002 | 10965-02

    Original file (10965-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 October 2003. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of together with all material submitted in support and applicable statutes, regulations, your naval record, 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 01439-02

    Original file (01439-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 August 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. Consequently,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 10329-02

    Original file (10329-02.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 11 May and again on 16 July 1959 you were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of a one day period of unauthorized absence (UA), failure to obey a lawful order, absence from your appointed place of duty, resisting arrest, and breach of the peace. The Board, in its review of your...

  • CG | BCMR | Discharge and Reenlistment Codes | 2008-021

    Original file (2008-021.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    … Applying today’s standards, it is unlikely the applicant would be awarded a discharge with a character of service any higher than his current General discharge.” CGPC stated that the applicant’s repeated mis- conduct contradicts his claim to having an “otherwise satisfactory record” and that his General discharge is not “unjust or disproportionate for his offenses and service.” APPLICANT’S RESPONSE TO THE VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD On March 16, 2008, the applicant responded, stating that he...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 09157-10

    Original file (09157-10.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 August 2011. 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...