DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 REC
Docket No: 05187-10
3 March 2011
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 2 March 2011. 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 reenlisted in the Marine Corps on 15 December 1955 after
serving honorably. On 11 January 1956, you received nonjudicial
punishment (NIP) for failure to muster. On 13 July 1956, you
received NUP for failure to obey a lawful order. On 4 November
1957, you were convicted by a summary court-martial (SCM) of
dereliction. You were sentenced to forfeiture of $50, and
reduction in pay grade. You were informed that you would receive
a general discharge at the expiration of your enlistment and you
were not eligible for reenlistment. The discharge authority
directed a general discharge. You were s0 discharged on
12 December 1958.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth and prior honorable service. However, the Board found
that these factors were not sufficient to warrant any change in
your character of service, given your record of two NJP’s and one
conviction by SCM. The Board also noted that you were fortunate
to receive a general discharge since a separation under other
than honorable conditions is often directed when an individual is
found to have committed misconduct. 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
evidence or other matter not previously considered by the Board.
In this regard, it ig 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,
Ee
Executive \Diketto
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 | CY2010 | 03688-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 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. Finally, the Board concluded that you were fortunate to have received a general discharge since Sailors discharged with a record of misconduct,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11259-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, gitting 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. An average of 4.0 in conduct was required at the time of your separation for a fully honorable characterization of service.
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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03530-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 November 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. You were sentenced to confinement During the period from 1 to 13 March 1956 you were convicted by civil authorities of failure to appear, two day period of UA. 2 Consequently, when applying for a correction of an...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06545-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 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. Subsequently, administrative discharge action was initiated and it was recommended that you receive an undesirable discharge by reason of unfitness.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05228-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 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 applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR00266 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 October 2013. 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 | 05071-11
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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...