Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 06419-08
Original file (06419-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

TUR

Docket No: 6419-08
21 May 2009

 

This is in reference to your application for correction of your
late grandfather’s 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 12 May 2009. The names and votes of the members
of the panel will be furnished upon request. 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 late grandfather’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 grandfather enlisted in the Naval Reserve on 6 May 1943
at age 17. He served without disciplinary incident until July
1944, when he received captain’s mast (CM) for disobeying a
lawful order. He was convicted by deck court (DC) in September
1944 of losing government property through negligence.

In November 1944 he was convicted by summary court-martial (SCM)
of striking another Sailor and sentenced to a $108 forfeiture of
pay and a bad conduct discharge (BCD). However, the BCD was
remitted for six months. Nonetheless, on 8 December 1944, he
received CM and the remitted BCD was vacated. Subsequently, the

BCD was approved at all levels of review, and on 18 May 1945 he
was so discharged.
The Board, in its review of your application with attachments and
your late grandfather’s entire record, carefully weighed all
potentially mitigating factors, such as his youth, correspondence
regarding his medical and mental state after his discharge from
the Navy, and his post service conduct. It also considered your
desire to upgrade his discharge. Nevertheless, the Board
concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of his discharge because of the seriousness of
his repetitive misconduct. Accordingly, your application has
been denied.

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 P ER
Executive ector

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 03745-06

    Original file (03745-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2010 | 11524-10

    Original file (11524-10.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 August 2011. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...

  • 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

    Original file (02498-99.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2007 | 08098-07

    Original file (08098-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2008 | 08015-08

    Original file (08015-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with ail material submitted in support thereof, your late father’s naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of his discharge because of his repeated periods of UA during wartime, court-martial convictions which resulted in BCD, and his continued misconduct after being awarded a BCD. ...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02986-08

    Original file (02986-08.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 2008. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04953-01

    Original file (04953-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 January 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. 1944 you received CM for a 23 day period of UA and the punishment At this time the suspended imposed was confinement for a month. Given the circumstances of your...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 00137-07

    Original file (00137-07.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 17 June 1943 at age 18. On 28 November 1944, you received a second CM for...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05757-00

    Original file (05757-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 8 December 1944 you were convicted by deck court On 18 October and on 3 November 1944 you received During the period from 12 February to 20 June 1945 you were convicted by DC on three occasions for a two day period of unauthorized absence (UA), drunkenness, and absence from your appointed place of duty. 15 months, and a bad conduct discharge (BCD). evidence in your record, and you submitted none, to support your contention that you were told that the discharge would be Even if you were,...