Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR6798 13
Original file (NR6798 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490

 

BUG
Docket No: 6798-13
24 July 2014

 

This is in reference to your application for correction of your
late father’s 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 23 July 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 father’s naval record and applicable
statutes, reguiations 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.

Your father enlisted in the Navy Reserve and entered active duty
on 23 June 1944. He requested an undesirable discharge (UD) for
the good of the service to avoid trial by court-martial for two
indecent assaults aboard ship on maie Sailors. He

acknowledged the adverse consequences of receiving such a
discharge. The separation authority approved his request for a
UD. On 8 June 1945, he was separated with a UD to avoid trial
by court-martial. As a result of this action, he was spared the
stigma of a court-martial conviction and the potential penalties
of a punitive discharge and confinement at hard labor.

The Board, in its review of his entire record, carefully
considered all potentially mitigating factors, such as his youth
and your desire to upgrade his characterization of service under
‘the repeal of “Don’t ask, don’t tell”. Nevertheless, the Board
concluded'that these factors were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of his discharge due to the two aggravating
factors of the acts being non-consensual and aboard a Naval
vessel, and his request for discharge. Furthermore, the Board
believed that considerable clemency was extended to him when his
request for discharge to avoid trial by court-martial was
approved. It was also clear to the Board that he received the
benefit of his bargain with the Navy when his request for
discharge was granted and you should not be permitted to change
it now. Finally, you are advised that no discharge is
‘automatically upgraded due merely to post service good conduct
or the passage of time. 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,
; ‘ AF

ROBERT D. ZSALMAN
Acting Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00324 12

    Original file (00324 12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 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. In your case, the Board found an aggravating factor, namely your participation ina homosexual act aboard a naval installation.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR3295 14

    Original file (NR3295 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. Your request was granted and the commanding officer directed your OTH discharge.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR3106 13

    Original file (NR3106 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    However, the Majority is willing to overlook the aggravating factors of the acts, and given his conduct average of 3.5, the majority concludes that a general characterization of service is 2 warranted. The majority concludes that based upon the Navy’s policy as established in reference (c), that relief in the form of his narrative reason for separation be changed to Secretarial Authority. That Petitioner's naval record be corrected to show that on 5 February 1960, he was issued a general...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR6077 13

    Original file (NR6077 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 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 | NR3538-13

    Original file (NR3538-13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 March. 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. you submitted a written request’ for: an other than honorable - discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR4567 13

    Original file (NR4567 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 April 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 | NR3253-13

    Original file (NR3253-13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 February 2014. 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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficiént to warrant recharacterization- of your discharge because of the seriousness of your...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 07777-05

    Original file (07777-05.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 6 January 1944. Although the request for...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 04345-08

    Original file (04345-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 February 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. On 11 February 1974, you requested an UD for the good of the service to avoid trial by court-martial for the two periods of UA that totaled 141 days.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 01890-03

    Original file (01890-03.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your late father's naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. Board believed that considerable clemency was extended to your father's request for discharge to avoid trail by court martial was granted since, by this action, confinement at hard labor and a punitive discharge. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval...