DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TAL
Docket No: 058-10
12 October 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 6 October 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 Marine Corps and began a period of active
duty on 28 April 1954 at age 19. You were convicted by summary
court-martial (SCM) on two occasions for assault. You received
nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on seven occasions for insubordinate
conduct toward a noncommissioned officer, disobeying lawful
orders, unauthorized absence (UA) from your unit, UA from your
appointed place of duty, and destruction of government property.
On 3 February 1956, you were convicted by general court martial
(GCM) of assault with a dangerous weapon, insubordinate conduct
toward a noncommissioned officer, threatening to kill and failure
to obey a lawful order. The sentence imposed was 18 months
confinement, forfeiture of all pay and allowances and a
dishonorable discharge (DD).
On 11 April 1956, you were diagnosed with an emotional
instability reaction because of severely disturbed behavior,
crying, tension, potential impulsive, violent behavior and
general unfitness for confinement. It was the opinion of the
medical board that you were mentally competent and responsible
for the particular offenses you committed, and competent to stand
trial, but disciplinary action in the form of confinement would
be likely to have a deleterious effect on your health and would
not be corrective or lead to a better service adjustment. On 29
June 1956, the Judge Advocate General of the Navy remitted the
unexecuted portion of the sentence relating to confinement and
forfeitures, and you received the DD after appellate review was
complete.
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and
Soveralloxcecondetiertervice. Nevertheless, the Board found that
ttiese:factors..wexa@@not sufficient to warrant recharacterization
Mees csseeretitde-qivén the seriousness of your misconduct that
resulted in a seven NUPs, two SCMs and a GCM conviction.
gccordingly,.yourwzapplication has been denied. The names and
#mvotes of the memBttrs 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 PFE]
Executive Di
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04682-09
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 29 June 1955, you were convicted by special court - martial (SPCM) of 35 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 | CY2011 | 04823-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 February 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 11385-09
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. You received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on two occasions for failure to go to your appointed place of duty and unauthorized absence (UA) from your unit for a period of four days. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR4572 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 April 2014. 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 | CY2011 | 05888-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 March 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 probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00021-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 September 2010. On 30 August 1989, you received NJP for UA Erom 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 | CY2013 | NR2807-13
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 $. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval ‘Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 February 2014. Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in Support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR4315 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 April 2014. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with ail material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. On 20 February 1973, you made a written request for discharge for the good of service to avoid trial by court-martial for failure to go to your...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04465-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 November 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. The record does not indicate if any disciplinary action was taken for this period of UA. good post service conduct, and your However, the Board concluded these...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02100-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 December 2009. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all materiai 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...