DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
SUN
Docket No: 03654-08
2 April 2009
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 31 March 2009. 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
27 August 1951 at age 17. On 6 May 1952, you were convicted by
special court-martial (SPCM) of a 53 day period of unauthorized
absence (UA). On 16 July 1953, you were convicted by general
court-martial (GCM) of 254 days of UA. You were sentenced to a
forfeiture of pay, confinement at hard labor, a reduction in
paygrade, and a bad conduct discharge (BCD). You received the
BCD after appellate review was completed.
“«
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, overall
record of service, and the character letters accompanying your
application. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors
were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your
discharge given your convictions by SPCM and GCM for periods of
UA totaling over 10 months. 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 PF
Executive D
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05064-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 March 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 gpplying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 04568-06
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 31 October 2006. During the period from 10 June to 22 August 1953 you received two NJP’s for brief period of UA, missing restricted muster, disobedience, and failure to muster for hard labor. 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 | CY2006 | 04560-06
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 March 2007. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 09535-08
- R three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your | application on 18 August 2009. 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 were sentenced to confinement for eight months and a bad conduct discharge (BCD).
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 12413-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 31 August 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. 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 | CY2008 | 08761-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 May 2009. 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 | CY2010 | 11234-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 August 2011. 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 burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 07019-05
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 May 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. 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 | 01450-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 December 2009. During the period from 16 May 1983 to 23 April 1984, you had three periods of UA totaling 295 days. 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 | CY2009 | 11655-09
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. On 16 September 1960, after appellate review, you were separated with a BCD. 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.