Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 11249-09
Original file (11249-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

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

 

TAL
Docket No: 11249-09
27 July 2010

 

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 21 July 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 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

21 August 1951 at age 17. On 26 July 1952, you were convicted by
summary court-martial (SCM) of unauthorized absence (UA) from
your unit for a period of 11 days and missing ship’s movement.

On 25 September 1952, you were convicted by SCM of two instances
of UA from your unit for a period totaling four days. On 5 May
1953, you were convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) of a 17
day period of UA from your unit. On 8 March 1954, you were again
convicted by SPCM of a four day period of UA and missing ship’s
movement. The sentence imposed was confinement for three months,
forfeiture of pay and a bad conduct discharge (BCD). The BCD was
suspended for a period of six months, unless the suspension was
vacated due to further misconduct. If no further misconduct the
BCD would have been remitted without further action. On 17 June
1954, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for UA from your
appointed place of duty. On 25 June 1954, you received NUP for
insubordinate conduct toward a petty officer. On 7 July 1954 the
BCD was vacated due to your continued misconduct. You received
the BCD after appellate review was complete.
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and
overall record of service. Nevertheless, the Board found that
these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization
of your discharge given the seriousness of your misconduct that
resulted in two NJPs, two SCMs and two SPCM convictions.

Finally, the Board also noted that you were given an opportunity
to earn a better characterization of service when the BCD you
received at an earlier court-martial was suspended, but failed to
do so as evidenced by your continued misconduct. Accordingly,
your application has been denied. The mames 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 PFEIFFER
Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2004 | 01128-04

    Original file (01128-04.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 that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injusticeThe Board found that you enlisted in the Navy on 25 July 1951 at age 17. On 7 February 1955 you...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07134-00

    Original file (07134-00.pdf) 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. Your record further reflects that on 19 May 1954 you were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of an eight day period of UA and sentenced to hard labor for 15 days, a $10 forfeiture of On 9 September 1954, while in a UA status, you were apprehended by civil authorities for temporary...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR3300-13

    Original file (NR3300-13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 February 2014. On 8 July 1948, you were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of UA from your unit for a period of four days and: missing ‘ship's movement. The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed all potentiaily mitigating factors, such as your prior honorable service.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00345-12

    Original file (00345-12.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 September 2012. 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 | CY2010 | 11864-10

    Original file (11864-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 August 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 | CY2009 | 10747-09

    Original file (10747-09.pdf) 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08241-10

    Original file (08241-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 April 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. On 25 November 1950, you were again convicted by SPCM of UA from your unit for a period of three days and sentenced to 30 days confinement, a...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04679-09

    Original file (04679-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 March 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 | CY2006 | 02667-06

    Original file (02667-06.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 July 1950 at age 20. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05868-01

    Original file (05868-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 February 2002. 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,...