DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 90370-5100
5100 REC
Docket No: 08496-0939
10 June 2010
This is in reference to your application for correction of your
“ate husband’s 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 9 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 ali 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 husband enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active
duty on 4 January 1963, at age 17. During his fiyst enlistment
he received ten nonjudicial punishments (NJP’s) for various
offenses. However, he received an honorable discharge. He
reenlisted in the Navy on 19 September 1967, at age 22. On
2 April 1968, he was convicted by a summary court-martial (SCM)
for being in an unauthorized absence (UA) status for five days,
and disobeying a lawful order. He was sentenced to forfeitures
of $136.40, reduction in pay grade and 30 days confinement at
hard labor. On 18 March 1969, he was convicted by special court-
martial (SPCM) for assault and battery to a superior petty
officer, unlawfully striking a petty officer, and two instances
of wrongfully threatening to kill a superior petty officer. He
was sentenced to forfeitures of $180, and 60 days confinement at
hard labor. On 7 April 1969, your husband received an NUP for
disobeying a lawful order and being disrespectful in language.
On 12 March 1970, he was again convicted by a SPCM for two
instances of being UA which totaled three months, and 18 days,
and missing the movement of the ship. He was sentenced to
forfeitures of $150, reduction in pay grade and 90 days
confinement at hard labor. On 19 June 1970, he received NUP for
willfully disobeying a commissioned officer. On 3 September
1970, he received NUP for assault. On 23 October 1970, he
received NIP for another period of UA. He was then notified of
pending administrative separation processing with an other than
honorable (OTH) discharge due to misconduct. He waived all of
his procedural rights, including his right to an administrative
discharge board (ADB). On 25 November 1970, he received the OTH
discharge for misconduct.
The Board, in its review of your husband’s record and your
application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating
factors. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were
not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of his discharge
because of the frequency of his misconduct, as shown by the four
NUP’s, and convictions by SCM and two SPCM’s. The Board also
noted that when he was provided an opportunity to defend himself
against these charges, he waived his right to present his case to
an ADB, his best opportunity for retention or a better
characterization of service. Accordingly, his application has
been denied. The names and votes 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. Sa OY
Executive Di x
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05796-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 March 2011. On 14 June 1979, you received NUP for being disrespectful toward you a chief petty officer on two occasions, and failure to obey a written regulation. On 17 February 1983, after appellate review, you received the BCD.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00456 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 October 2012. On 28 September 1965, you received NJP for being UA for seven days. In this regard, the Board noted that you admitted to participating in homosexual acts under aggravating circumstances by receiving compensation.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 01145 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 November 2012. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant changing the characterization of your discharge, given your record of three NJP’s, two convictions by SPCM’s, and by two SCM’s of serious misconduct. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00575-12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 November 2012. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03541-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 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. 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 | 05791-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 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 | CY2010 | 03805-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 January 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,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00214-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your , application on 13 October 2011. On 13 December 1961, you received NUP for three incidents of failure to go to your appointed place of duty. - 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 | 00468 12
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 §. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 October 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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03737-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 January 2011. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, ‘together with all material submitted in support thereof, your deceased husband’s naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Confequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...