DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
é-
%
Mia
“a
a
st ate,
“ST r
a
SJN
Docket No: 08858-10
8 June 2011
This is in reference to your application for correction of your
late husband's 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 7 June 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 late husband's 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.
Your late husband enlisted in the Navy and began a period of
active duty on 13 March 1946. On 25 September 1946, he began a
period of unauthorized absence (UA). His command was informed
that he had been arrested and convicted by civil authorities, the
day before his UA started, on 24 September 1946, of a violation
of the California vehicle code and theft of an automobile. He
was sentenced to two years of probation, six months in jail,
which was suspended for the period of probation, ordered not to
drive for a period of one year, refrain from drinking alcohol,
and a fine of $100. On 24 October 1946, he returned from being
UA. On 29 October 1946, he was convicted by summary court-
martial (SCM) of 28 days of UA. He was sentenced to extra duty
and a forfeiture of pay. Although your husband’s commanding
officer recommended that he be retained in the naval service, the
Chief of Naval Personnel directed that he be separated from the
Navy with an undesirable discharge by reason of misconduct due to
the conviction by civil authorities. Subsequently, he received
an undesirable discharge on 22 November 1946.
The Board, in its review of your late husband’s entire record and
your application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating
factors, such as his youth, overall record of service, reason why
he went UA, character letter, and your present medical condition.
Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not
sufficient to warrant recharacterization of his discharge based
on the civil conviction of very serious offenses. 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,
Loa
Executive D tor
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08098-07
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your late father’s naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. On 18 March 1946 he was convicted by civil authorities of robbery and sentenced to an unspecified period of confinement. 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 | 06889-08
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your late father’s naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Your late father enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on 17 December 1957 at age 17. 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 | CY2002 | 02562-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 31 July 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. On 22 June 1973 the commanding officer recommended that he be The record reflects that on 14 July 1969 he On 4 February 1970 he was evacuated On 21 September 1972 he was The court sentenced him to five years separated with...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04914-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 January 2010. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your husband’s 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 | CY2009 | 13393-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 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 | CY2013 | NR2672-13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 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 | CY2009 | 00618-09
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your late husband's naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Subsequently, upon his return, on 19 February 1970, he submitted a request for an administrative discharge in order to avoid trial by another court-martial for the additional periods of UA. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 07446-05
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 7 September 1966 at age 17 and served for over a year without disciplinary...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1998 | NC9807447
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 June 1999. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, the case summary prepared in connection with the Board's review of your late father case in 1950 and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR466 13
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your late husband's 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...