DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TIR
Docket No: 4771-09
26 April 2010
, gs na th , ;
This is in reference to your application for correction of your
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 20 April 2010. 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 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 materiai error or
injustice.
You enlisted in the Navy on 22 February 1944 at age 20. You
served for a year and six months without disciplinary incident,
however, on 2 August 1945, you received captain’s mast (CM) for
being insolent to a superior officer. The punishment imposed was
reduction in paygrade to seaman first class (Slc). The record
does not contain documentation regarding an appeal to this CM.
On 23 April 1946, at the expiration of your enlistment, you were
honorably discharged while serving in paygrade Sic.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as the
passage of time, your desire to be reinstated to paygrade S2c,
and the supporting documentation provided with your application.
Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not
' sufficient to warrant a change in your record because of the
seriousness of your misconduct which resulted in CM. Further,
the Board concluded that your misconduct was sufficient to
support the reduction to Sle and should not be changed based
solely on the passage of time or assertions of regret.
Accordingly, your application has been denied.
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,
Executive Di
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00518-10
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. In this regard, the Board concluded the sentence imposed was fair. 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 | 00305-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 February 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 08752-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 June 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. The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your prior service,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01610-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 November 2010. After waiving your procedural rights, the discharge authority directed your commanding officer to issue you an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense, and on 18 April 1990, you were so discharged. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02348-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 February 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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of your...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 12825-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 September 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 02760-07
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.You enlisted in the Navy on 4 October 1983 at age 19 and served for nearly a year without disciplinary...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08721-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 October 2008. 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 | 03195-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 March 2009. 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 | 06271-09
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. On 31 July 2004 you received NJP for assaulted consummated by battery and were awarded restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to paygrade E-2, and a $1,412 forfeiture of pay. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant...