Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04914-09
Original file (04914-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

CRS
Docket No: 4914-09
28 January 2010

 

This is in. reference to your application for correction of your
late husband’s 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 21 January 2010. Your allegations of error and
injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative
regulations and procedures applicabie 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 husband’s 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.

The Board found that your husband enlisted in the Navy on 14 May
1948. On 1 May 1950 he was convicted by civil authorities of
grand larceny and sentenced to probation for three years. On 18
July 1950 he received an undesirable discharge by reason of
misconduct due to the civil conviction.

In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all
potentially mitigating factors, such as his youth and overall
record of service. The Board found those factors insufficient to
warrant recharacterization of his discharge, given the nature and
severity of his civilian offense. Accordingly, your application
has been denied. The names and votes of the members of the panel
will be furnished upon request.

Tt 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 ali 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,

Wor S-east

W. DEAN PFE
Executive D r

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08858-10

    Original file (08858-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 June 2010. 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. Although your husband’s commanding officer recommended that he be retained in the naval service, the Chief of Naval Personnel directed...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04389-09

    Original file (04389-09.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. About six months later, on 8 January 1969, he received NUP for a nine day period of UA. 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 | 04201-09

    Original file (04201-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 February 2010. 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. On 16 April 1987, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 08496-09

    Original file (08496-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 June 2010. 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 ali material submitted in support thereof, your late husband's naval record, and applicable statutes,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03426-09

    Original file (03426-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    R three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your ~ application on 13 January 2010. 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. On 16 September 1974, he began a 134 day period of UA from his unit until he surrendered on 28 January 1975, On 12 March 1975,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 02562-02

    Original file (02562-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 31 July 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. On 22 June 1973 the commanding officer recommended that he be The record reflects that on 14 July 1969 he On 4 February 1970 he was evacuated On 21 September 1972 he was The court sentenced him to five years separated with...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01628-09

    Original file (01628-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 November 2009. your application, together with all Material submitted in support thereof, your late husband’s naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your late husband's discharge because of the seriousness of his misconduct and...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01664-10

    Original file (01664-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 October 2009. 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 that the evidence submitted was insufficient to...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 09033-08

    Original file (09033-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 January 2009. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06601-00

    Original file (06601-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 April 2001. 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. On 1 December 1953 he pled guilty to issuing On 27 August The court sentenced him to confinement The court deferred On 26 February 1954 a board of officers...