DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TAL
Docket No: 5719-10
11 February 2011
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 9 February 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 enlisted in the Marine Corps and began a period of active
duty on 7 February 1956 at age 18. On 12 July 1956, you received
nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for damage to government property
and conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline. On 15
February 1957, you received NUP for unauthorized absence (UA)
from your unit for a period of six days. On 11 March 1957, you
received NUP for wrongful appropriation. On 12 April 1957, you
were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of drunk and
disorderly conduct. On 20 November 1957, you were again
convicted by SCM of UA from your unit for a period of three days.
On 20 November 1957, you received NUP for failure to obey a
lawful order. On 4 August 1960, you were convicted by special
court-martial of UA from your unit for a period of 723 days. The
sentence imposed was confinement of one year, forfeiture of pay,
reduction in paygrade and a bad conduct discharge (BCD). On
12 May 1961, 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 four NUPs, two SCMs, a SPCM and periods of UA that
totaled over two years. 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
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’ PI YP
Executive \Dinegtdar
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 | 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 | 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 | 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 | 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 | 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 | CY2008 | 10973-08
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON BC 20370-5100 TUR Docket No: 10973-08 20 August 2009 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. 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. ...
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 | CY2009 | 12366-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 September 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...
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.