DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD
ARLINGTON, VA 22204
SUN
Docket No: 03114-1211
°10 January 2012
This is in reference to your application for correction of your Late
father’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 5 January
2012. The names and votes of the members of the panel will be
furnished upon request. 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 father’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.
On 21 September 1956, your late father reenlisted in the Marine Corps
after serving over three years of honorable service. On
25 January 1958, he received nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for creating
a disturbance in a public place and was reduced in paygrade, which was
suspended for a period of six months. Unfortunately, on 21 June 1957,
the suspended reduction in paygrade was vacated due to his additional
misconduct. On 23 September 1958, he began a period of unauthorized
absence (UA) that lasted 85 days and ended with his apprehension on
17 December 1958. On 10 January 1958, he was convicted by special
court-martial (SPCM) of 85 days of UA. He was sentenced to a
forfeiture of pay, confinement at hard labor, and a bad conduct
discharge (BCD). On 20 January 1958, the convening authority approved
the sentence, but suspended the BCD for a period of six months. On 15
May 1958, he was released from confinement and returned to full duty.
On 21 May 1958, he began a period of UA that lasted two days. On 2
July 1958, his commanding officer executed the suspended BCD which he
received 16 duly 1958.
The Board, in its review of his record and application, carefully
weighed all potentially mitigating. factors, such as his youth and your
desire to upgrade his discharge. Nevertheless, based on the
information currently contained in his record, the Board concluded
these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of his
discharge given his NUP, SPCM conviction for a period of UA lasting
over two months, and the fact that he failed his opportunity for
retention whereby he could have earned a better characterization of
service when his BCD was suspended for six months. Accordingly, your
application has been denied.
Tt 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,
Ly ’
W. DEAN PFE
Executive Dire
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11524-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 August 2011. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 09147-10
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 late father’s naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. On 11 January 1950, he was convicted by a second SCM of an eight day period of UA and sentenced to a forfeiture of pay, and a bad...
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 | CY2011 | 03897-11
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 3 March 1975, the convening authority approved the sentence, but the BCD and a period of confinement at hard labor were suspended for six months. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08015-08
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with ail material submitted in support thereof, your late father’s naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of his discharge because of his repeated periods of UA during wartime, court-martial convictions which resulted in BCD, and his continued misconduct after being awarded a BCD. ...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04679-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 March 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 probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04389-09
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. About six months later, on 8 January 1969, he received NUP for a nine day period of UA. 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 | 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 | CY2009 | 04676-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 March 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 probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 02609-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 January 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, Sailors with an extensive record of misconduct, such as yours, normally receive discharges under other than honorable conditions, and...