DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 REC
Docket No: 03602-10
20 January 2011
ion for correction of your
s 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 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, 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 and began a period of active duty on 5
November 1954, at age 17. On 6 January 1955, you were convicted
in the District Court of Madison County, Nebraska, of breaking
and entering. Your sentence was postponed until you were
discharged from the Navy. On 16 January 1955, you were convicted
by a summary court-martial (SCM) of being in an unauthorized
absence (UA) status for five days. You were sentenced to
forfeitures of $15, and three days confinement at hard labor.
Administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of
misconduct. On 1 April 1955, your case was heard by an
administrative discharge board (ADB), which voted three to zero
in favor of an undesirable discharge due to misconduct. Your
commanding officer concurred with the ADB’s finding and
recommended that you be discharged under other than honorable
(OTH) conditions by reason of misconduct. On 18 April 1955, you
received the OTH due to misconduct.
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, conduct
and performance, and overall record of service. Nevertheless,
the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant
changing the reason or characterization of your discharge, given
your record of misconduct. 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,
od Wont
W. DEAN PFEI R
Executive Di Oo
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08359-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 May 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. On 3 January 1977, you received NJP for an unknown period of UA.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04497-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 January 2003. 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 30 June 1955 you received an undesirable discharge.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06566-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 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. On 24 January 1994, the discharge authority directed an OTH discharge by reason of misconduct.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00082-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 September 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. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge, given your record of two...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05787-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 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. On 4 April 1985, your case was heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB), which voted three to zero in favor of an other than honorable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03793-10
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 one NUP and conviction by SCM of drug abuse and misconduct. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 12296 12
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 7 June 1956, you received an OTH discharge for misconduct (unfitness). 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 | CY2010 | 10654-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 August 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 | CY2010 | 11372-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 July 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. On 13 April 2005, your case was forwarded and the discharge authority concurred with the ADB’s finding and recommendation, and directed that you be...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06652-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 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...