DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
TAL
Docket No: 345-12
27 September 2012
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 26 September 2012. 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
31 October 1950 at age 20. You received nonjudicial punishment
(NOP) on two occasions, 26 March and 6 May 1951 for failure to
go to your appointed place of duty, failure to obey a lawful
regulation and dereliction in the performance of your duty. On
10 May 1951, you were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM)
of unauthorized absence (UA) from your unit for a period of six
days. On 1 November 1951, you received NUP, for UA from your
unit for a period totaling 32 hours. On 27 December 1951, you
were convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) of UA from your
unit for two periods totaling 25 days and missing ship's
movement. The sentence imposed was confinement and a bad
conduct discharge (BCD). On 8 April 1952, you were again
convicted by SPCM of UA for a period of two days, two instances
of failure to obey a lawful order and breaking restriction. On
9 July 1952, you received the BCD after appellate review was
complete.
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and
overall record of service. Nevertheless, the Board found that
these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization
of your discharge given the repetitive and serious nature of
your misconduct that resulted in three NUPs, a SCM and two
SPCMs, all which took place during the Korean War. 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,
Executive Director
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 | CY2013 | NR8248 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 August 2014. 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 | CY2011 | 03331-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 January 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. Your offenses were two specifications of disobedience, failure to obey a lawful order, two periods of UA totalling two days, assault, and two...
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 | CY2008 | 12239-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 November 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 09712 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 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. On 5 December 1975 you received your seventh NUP for two periods of absence from your appointed place of duty and a three day period of UA.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 09613-06
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 15 July 1948 you enlisted in the Navy at age 18. On 19 September 1952 you received CM for throwing...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07529-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 May 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. About four months later, on 2 November 1984, you were convicted by SPCM of a 48 day period of UA and sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 63...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04679-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 March 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 | CY2012 | 00151-12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 September 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...