DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
BAN
Docket No: 06962-10
19 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 16 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 entered active duty in the Navy on 3 August 1954, and served
without disciplinary incident until 13 July 1955, when you were
convicted at a summary court-martial of an unauthorized absence
(UA). Shortly thereafter, you received the following
disciplinary actions: om 25 October 1955, you were convicted at
a special court-martial (SPCM) of larceny; and on 14 June 1956
you were convicted at a SPpCM of UA in excess of 61 days, and
missing ship’s movement. Your sentence at the second SPCM
included a bad conduct discharge (BCD). After appellate review,
on 2 November 1956, you were separated from the Navy with a BCD.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth, injuries sncurred while on active duty, and belief
that your offenses do not warrant a BCD. Nevertheless, the Board
concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your discharge because of the seriousness
of your 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
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 PRBI
Executive Di or
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 | 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 | CY2006 | 04308-06
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 4 December 1953 at age 18. About six months later, on 23 June...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 05183-03
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 8 December 1952 at age 17. On 23 November 1953 you received...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 07019-05
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 May 2006. 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 | 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 | CY2012 | 03037-12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 March 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 | 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 | CY2002 | 03302-99
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. Your allegations of error and 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...
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...