Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 04623-07
Original file (04623-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
                                    2 NAVY ANNEX
                                             WASHINGTON DC 20370-5 100


                                                                                          T RG
Docket No: 4623-07
27 December 2007







This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions of title 10 of the 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 11 December 2007. 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 that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.
You enlisted in the Naval Reserve on 17 January 1945 and reported for active duty. On 18 March 1946, you received nonjudicial punishment for an unauthorized absence of about eight days. About the same time, you made a statement admitting to multiple thefts of cash which totaled about $165. A summary court-marital convened on 26 March 1946 and convicted you of theft. The court sentenced you, as mitigated, to a bad conduct discharge. The bad conduct discharge was issued on 16 May 1946.
In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and the documentation you submitted showing that you have been a good citizen for many years. The Board found that these factors and Contentions were not sufficient to warrant recharacterjzatjon of your discharge given your conviction by Court-martial of a serious offense. The Board was aware that $165 was a large amount of money in 1946 and at the time individuals convicted of theft normally received a bad conduct discharge. 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 Diretor

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 03412-07

    Original file (03412-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 February 2008. 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 21 May 1947, while in civil custody, the discharge authority directed discharge by reason of desertion for a 137 day period of UA and civil...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 01821-06

    Original file (01821-06.rtf) 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.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 Navy on 5 June 1959 at age 17 and served without disciplinary infraction until 19...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03851-02

    Original file (03851-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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 | CY2002 | 02786-02

    Original file (02786-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 August 2002. 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. You were sentenced to extra duty for three months and a bad conduct you were convicted by SCM of theft of .45 caliber pistol valued at The BCD was suspended for 12...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR3154-13

    Original file (NR3154-13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    session, considered ‘your application on 19 February 2014. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of the seriousness of your repetitive misconduct which included theft from a fellow Marine and resulted in two NJPs and two SPCMs. 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 | 00573-07

    Original file (00573-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 November 2007. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 01731-06

    Original file (01731-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 September 2006. 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 ecord, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 10888-02

    Original file (10888-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 May 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 found that these factors and contentions were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11000-10

    Original file (11000-10.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 1 April 1968 you received your third NUP for two periods of absence from your appointed place of duty. 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 | CY2001 | 03947-01

    Original file (03947-01.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. However, while the administrative discharge recommendation was being processed, you began another series of unauthorized absences. During the period 25 April to 1 July 1980 you were an unauthorized absentee on three occasions totaling about 35 days.