\
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
7Oi S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
CRS
Docket No: 3296-13
9 April 2014
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 November 2013. 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 enlisted in the Navy on 14 November
1963. On 21 April 1965 a special court-martial’ convened and
found you guilty of contempt and sentenced you to confinement at
hard labor for 30 days and forfeiture of $50.00 per month for
two months. On 6 May 1965 a-special court-martial convened and
found you guilty of absence from your appointed place of duty
and willful disobedience -of a lawful order and sentenced you to
a reduction in rate and a bad conduct: discharge (BCD).
Thereafter, you were convicted by six summary courts-martial of
a violation ofa lawful general regulation and willful
disobedience Of lawful orders on six occasions. You were
separated with a BCD on 2 November. 1965 after appellate review.
it
{
In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, overall
record of service, and the unsubstantiated contention that your
discharge had been previously upgraded. The Board concluded
that these factors were insufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your service, given the serious and
repeated nature of your misconduct, which ultimately resulted in
your discharge. Regarding your contention, there is no evidence
in your record to support it, and you have provided no such
evidence. Accordingly, your application has been denied. The
_) IZ names and votes of the members of tHé panel will be furnished.
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,
ROBERT D. ZSALMAN
Acting Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR8357 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 August 2014. However, on 12 March 1975, the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) upgraded your BCD to a general discharge for the convenience of the government. 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 | CY2007 | 04031-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 January 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. On 5 November 1965 and 3 March 1967, you received two more NUJP’s for a four-day period of UA and another period of UA.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04877-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 November 2002. You received the bad conduct discharge on 21 January 1958. 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 | CY1999 | 00347-99
You were sentenced to confinement at hard labor for four months, forfeitures of $55 per month for four months and a bad conduct discharge. Thereafter, the commanding officer recommended an You were so discharged on An enlisted The Chief of Naval The board concluded The Board noted your contentions that you had an NJPs and convictions by four summary courts-martial and a In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors such as your youth and...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 00494-03
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 June 2003. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of Board. conduct discharge was issued on 10 May 1963. confinement at hard labor for three The to forfeiture of $40 pay per On 2 April 1965 you elected The bad such as your...
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 | CY2008 | 00456-08
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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08189-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 June 2001.. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable Board. to go to your appointed special court-martial (SPCM) of failure place of duty and were sentenced to hard labor for a month and a $60 forfeiture of pay. paygrade E-l and restriction for 15 convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of disobedience and...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 02092-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 January 2003. However, the Board concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge due to your extensive disciplinary record which included Accordingly, your unauthorized absences totalling 13 months. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 09486-08
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...