DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
BJG
Docket No: 1664-10
27 October 2010
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 26 October 2009. 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 that the evidence submitted was
insufficient to establish the existence of probable material
error or injustice. The Board found that your late husband
entered active duty in the Navy on 11 July 1961. He received
nonjudicial punishment on six occasions, and was convicted by a
summary court-martial and two special courts-martial (SPCM).
His offenses included unauthorized absence (eight
specifications totaling 162 days), being drunk and disorderly,
disobeying a superior commissioned officer, insubordination,
sleeping on watch, and making a false official statement. The
sentence at his second SPCM included a bad conduct discharge
(BCD). On 19 April 1966, after appellate review, he received
the BCD.
The Board, in its review of your late husband’s entire record,
carefully considered all potential mitigation, such as his
youth. Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these factors
were not sufficient to warrant upgrading his discharge due his
numerous acts of misconduct. 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
‘the Board... In fhis regard, it is important to keep in mind
hat a presumption of regularity attaches to all official
ecords. 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,
Executive D oO
NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 00588-05
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 October 2005. 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 the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11738-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 August 2011. 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 the existence...
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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 03745-06
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 Naval Reserve on 14 December 1942 at the age of 17. ...
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 | 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 | CY2001 | 02922-01
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. the circumstances of your husband's case, the Board concluded his discharge was proper as issued and no change is warranted. 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 | CY1999 | Document scanned on Mon Sep 25 09_11_22 CDT 2000
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. received the BCD. He was sentenced to forfeitures totalling $234 and a About a month later, on 25 June 1945, he received CM On 23 October 1945 he At this The Board also considered your The Board, in its review of your late husband’s entire record and your application,...
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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 02498-99
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. At this time the BCD was ordered executed. The Board, in its review of your late husband's entire record and your application, carefully considered all mitigating factors, such as his youth and immaturity.