DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
BUG
Docket No: 10393-09
30 June 2010
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 29 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 naval record and applicable
statutes, regulations and policies.
After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire
record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was
insufficient to establish the existence of probable material
error or injustice. The Board found that you entered active
duty in the Army on 27 February 1946, and were honorably
discharged on 18 November 1948. On 1 May 1950, you enlisted in
the Navy. On 2 March 1953, you were recommended for
administrative separation with an undesirable discharge for
unclean habits (you had contracted venereal disease on three
occasions in a 21 month period). You were then counseled and
warned that further misconduct could result in administrative
separation. On 1 July 1953, you were convicted at a special
court-martial of stealing another Sailor’s watch. Your
sentence included a bad conduct discharge (BCD). On 24 March
1954, after appellate review, you received the BCD.
In its review of your application, the Board carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, prior
honorable service, and desire to upgrade your discharge.
However, the Board concluded that your BCD should not be
changed due to your serious act of misconduct. The Board noted
that you committed another offense after being counseled and
warned that further misconduct could result in administrative
separation. In view of the above, 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 P R
Executive Di wactor
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02544-09
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. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your record of NUP, conviction by SPCM for periods of UA totaling over six months, and the fact that you were given a opportunity to earn a better characterization of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09416-07
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.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 27 October 1952, you enlisted in the Navy at age 17 with parental consent. On 11 February 1954,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 05009-09
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. 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 three NUJP’s and one SPCM conviction. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 10747-09
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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01326-10
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS . A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 November 2010. You were notified of pending administrative discharge processing with an other than honorable (OTH) discharge due to misconduct.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 11653-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 August 2010. 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 | CY2004 | 01128-04
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 that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injusticeThe Board found that you enlisted in the Navy on 25 July 1951 at age 17. On 7 February 1955 you...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 11249-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 July 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 | 03372-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 January 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. Additionally, after your second NUP, you were counseled and warned that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03027-09
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. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to.warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your record of three NUP’s and conviction by two SCM’s and one SPCM for serious misconduct. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record,...