DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 .
SIN
Docket No: 09257-07
6 November 2008
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 4 November 2008. 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 Navy and began a period of active duty on
14 February 1944 at age 19. On 7 March 1945, you were convicted
by summary court-martial (SCM) of a 10 day period of unauthorized
absence (UA). On 6 August 1945, you were convicted by deck court
(DC) of insubordination. On 20 October 1945, you began a period
of UA that ended when you were apprehended by civil authorities
for grand larceny on 20 November 1945. On 27 December 1945, you
were convicted by SCM of 30 days of UA.
Based on the information currently contained in your record it
appears you remained on active duty and were released under
honorable conditions at the expiration of your enlistment on
20 May 1946.
Characterization of service is based in part on conduct and
proficiency averages computed from marks assigned on a periodic
basis. Your conduct average was 2.7. At the time of your
service, a conduct average of 3.25 was required for a fully
honorable characterization of service.
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, overall
record of service, and your belief that your characterization of
service would change after a period of time for good behavior.
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. Further, you are advised
that there is no provision in the law or Naval Regulations that
allow for recharacterization automatically due solely to the
passage of time. 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, ~\
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08098-07
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, regulations, and policies. On 18 March 1946 he was convicted by civil authorities of robbery and sentenced to an unspecified period of confinement. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 03412-07
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 | CY2010 | 01433-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 October 2010. 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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of your repetitive...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11622-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval | Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 August 2011. 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,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 01249-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 October 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 25 March 1945, you began another period of UA when you failed to comply with orders.
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 | CY2008 | 00870-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 December 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. 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 | CY2009 | 00907-09
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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant upgrading your discharge given your two SCM’s, conviction by SPCM, and failure to attain the required average in cohduct. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 03209-06
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 9 February 1944 at .age 17 and began a period of extended active...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02847-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 December 2008. Given your disciplinary actions, failure to attain the minimum behavior mark average required to form the basis for a fully honorable characterization of service, and since you have been treated no differently than others in your situation, the Board found that your service warranted a general characterization of service. Nevertheless, the Board...