DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-24890
BIG
Docket No: 6076-13
3 June 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 3 June 2014. 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.
You enlisted in the Navy and entered a period of active duty on
4 October 1944. You received 11 ¢aptain’s masts and one deck
“court. Your offenses included neglect of duty (four instances),
leaving your post without a proper relief, unauthorized absence
(five days), gambling during working hours (two instances),
shirking duty (three instances), fighting, and sleeping in an
unauthorized place after reveille (two instances). You were
then notified that your commanding officer was recommending you
for administrative separation due to misconduct. You exercised
your procedural right to have your case heard by an
administrative discharge board (ADB). The ADB found that you
had committed misconduct, and recommended that you be discharged
with an undesirable characterization of service. On 17 June
1947, you were discharged with an undesirable characterization
of service due to unfitness.
In its review of your application, the Board carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, World
War II service, and current desire to upgrade your discharge.
However, the Board concluded that your discharge should not be
“upgraded due to your numerous acts of misconduct. You are
advised that no discharge is upgraded due merely to the passage
of time or post service good conduct. 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 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,
De, Fm
ROBERT D. ZSALMAN
Acting Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR7548 13
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 7014S. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 August 2014. On 11 May 1954, you received the undesirable characterization of service due to unfitness.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR7715 13
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. However, the Board concluded that your discharge should not be upgraded due to your acts of misconduct. 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 | CY2013 | NR5931 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval ‘Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application 3 June 2014. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. 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 | CY2013 | NR5909 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 June 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 | CY2013 | NR6863 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 July 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 | CY2013 | NR5808 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 May 2014. You were then advised that your command was administratively separating you with an other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service due to misconduct. 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 | CY2013 | NR7757 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application 19 August 2014. On 9 February 1987, you received an OTH characterization of: service discharge due to Misconduct, and were assigned an RE-4 (not recommended for retention) reenlistment code. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden igs on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR5029 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 April 2014. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. 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 | CY2013 | NR5369 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 May 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 | CY2013 | NR5320 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application 14 May 2014. Your commanding officer then recommended you for administrative separation with an other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service discharge due to misconduct. 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.