DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 . REC
Docket No: 00654-0989
7 December 2009
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 3 December 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 on 6 November 1951, at the age of 17.
On 16 August 1952, you were convicted at civil court in Muskegon,
Michigan for auto theft and returned to the custody of the Navy.
On 16 October 1952, you were convicted at a special court-martial
(SPCM}) for two period of unauthorized absence (UA) totaling 32
days and failure to obey the technical arrest orders. You were
sentenced to receive a forfeiture of $160, and confinement at
hard labor. You were notified that administrative discharge
procedures were initiated and that you would receive a general
discharge. You were so discharged on 15 January 1953.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
garefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth and immaturity. However, the Board found that these
factors were not sufficient to warrant any change in your
character of service, given your record of the civil conviction
and SPCM for misconduct. The Board also noted that you were
fortunate to receive a general discharge since a discharge under
other than honorable conditions is often directed when an
individual is found to have committed misconduct. Accordingly,
7
‘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 P
Executive ctor
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 12239-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 November 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00553-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 October 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 09613-06
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.On 15 July 1948 you enlisted in the Navy at age 18. On 19 September 1952 you received CM for throwing...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04632-02
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 9 November 1955 the discharge authority then directed an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct. On 22 November The Board The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your prior honorable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 03654-08
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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07933-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 April 2001. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. On 29 July 1952 you submitted a written request for an undesirable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for participating in homosexual acts. Your request was granted on 16 August 1952 and as a result...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03878-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 April 2010. On 7 January 1953, you were convicted by SPCM of an 18 day period of UA from your unit. 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 | CY2012 | 07558-12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 May 2013. 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 20 January 1954, you were notified of pending administrative discharge processing with an other than honorable (OTH) discharge due to unfitness.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 11249-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 July 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 | CY2009 | 01298-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 December 2009. , 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 of injustice. Your request for discharge was granted and on 19 December 1972, you received an other than honorable discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial...