DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TJIR
Docket No: 12366-09
16 September 2010
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 14 September 2010. 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 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
lnjuetice:.
You enlisted in the Navy on 8 October 1956 at age 17. You served
for about four months without disciplinary incident, but on 26
February 1957, you received nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for
being in an unauthorized absence (UA) status. On 25 September
1957 you were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of a four
day period of UA and two specifications of failure to obey a
lawful order. You were sentenced to restriction for 10 days, a
$30 forfeiture of pay, and confinement at hard labor for five
months. On 12 June 1958 you received NUP for absence from your
appointed place of duty.
On 6 August 1960 you were convicted by SCM of disrespect and
failure to obey a lawful order. You were sentenced to
confinement at hard labor for 20 days, a $60 forfeiture of pay,
and reduction to seaman apprentice, which was suspended for six
months. Subsequently, on 28 October 1960 and upon completion of
your required active service, you were released from active duty
under honorable conditions and transferred to the Navy Inactive
Reserve. On 1 November 1962, at the expiration of your
enlistment, you were issued a general discharge.
At the time of your release from active duty and discharge,
character of service was based, in part, on conduct and overall
trait averages which were computed from marks assigned during
periodic evaluations. Your conduct average was 2.9, however, an
average of 3.0 in conduct was required for a fully honorable
eharacterization-of service.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth and desire to change the characterization of your
discharge. It also considered your assertion that you were
deliberately assigned low averages because of your refusal to
take an advancement test. Nevertheless, the Board concluded
these factors were not sufficient to warrant relief because of
your repetitive misconduct, and since your conduct average was
insufficiently high to warrant a fully honorable characterization
of service. Finally, there is no evidence in the record, and you
submitted none, to support your assertion. 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 PFE
Executive eso
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04414-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 December 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 11044-06
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.You enlisted in the Marine Corps on 18 Nay 1960 at age 18. You were sentenced to confinement at hard...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 03750-07
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 16 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 | CY2010 | 10669-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 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. April 1961, you were convicted by a SCM of being UA for one day.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01415-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 October 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. On 25 June 1973 you received NUP for six periods of absence from your appointed place of duty and a one day period of UA.
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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08556-01
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 October 1960 you submitted a written request for immediate execution of the 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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00214-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your , application on 13 October 2011. On 13 December 1961, you received NUP for three incidents of failure to go to your appointed place of duty. - 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 | CY2010 | 06105-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 March 2011. About six months later, on 13 May 1957, you were convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) of a 38 day period of UA. The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your prior honorable service, belief that you received a bad conduct (BCD) or dishonorable (DD) discharge,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05719-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 February 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 15 February 1957, you received NUP for unauthorized absence (UA) from your unit for a period of six days.