DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
BAN
Docket No: 00429-10
22 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. 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 31 May 1955, and served without
disciplinary incident until 21 July 1955, when you were convicted
at a summary court-martial of an unauthorized absence (UA).
Shortly thereafter, on 29 September 1955, you were convicted at a
special court-martial of assault and two specifications of
conspiracy to commit a general orders violation. On 3 January
1957, you were convicted at a general court-martial (GCM) of UA
in excess of 45 days. Your sentence at the GCM included a bad
conduct discharge (BCD). After appellate review, on 7 October
1957, you were separated from the naval service with a BCD and an
RE-4 reenlistment code.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth and belief that enough time has elapsed to warrant
upgrading your discharge. Nevertheless, the Board concluded
these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization
of your discharge because of your repeated and lengthy periods of
UA. Finally, there is no provision of law or in Navy regulations
that allows for recharacterization of service due solely to the
passage of time. Accordingly, 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
yevidence or other matter not previously considered by the Board.
In thiseregard, it is important to keep in mind that a
presuniption 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,
Loa
W. DEAN
Executive! RilxBctor
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 10183-02
You were again convicted by SPCM on 11 October 1956 of larceny and sentenced to confinement at hard labor for two months, a $60 forfeiture of pay, and a bad conduct discharge (BCD). On 21 October You were sentenced to a $30 forfeiture of pay You were sentenced to confinement at hard Your allegations of error and The BCD However, on' by civil authorities ,on 23 On 11 January 1957 you were convicted by SPCM of the foregoing period of UA and sentenced to a $330 forfeiture of pay, On 3...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05064-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 March 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 gpplying 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
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 | CY2008 | 02968-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 December 2008. However, in your absence, you were still sentenced to a bad conduct discharge (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 | CY2008 | 12497-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your | application on 21 October 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 or injustice. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01350-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 November 2010. On 29 October 1957 you were so discharged. 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 | 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 | CY2009 | 09067-09
You also were convicted by three summary courts-martial (SCM) of two periods of UA, two specifications of Gisobedience, and absence from your appointed place of duty. You were notified of pending administrative separation action and an administrative discharge board (ADB) recommended that you be discharge from the service with an undesirable discharged due to unfitness. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...
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 | CY2007 | 08758-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 October 2008. 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. As a result, on 2 September 1960, you were convicted by general court-martial (GCM) of three periods of UA totalling 184 days and sentenced to a...