DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
7014S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
BUG
Docket No: 7548-13
13 August 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 12 August 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. In addition, the Board considered the
report of the Naval Discharge Review Board, dated 11 March 1955,
a copy of which is attached.
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 began a period of active duty on 4
December 1950. You received Captain’s Mast on four occasions
and were convicted by a summary court-martial and two special
courts-martial. .Your offenses included six periods of
unauthorized absence totaling 71 days, conduct prejudicial to
good order and discipline, and failure to obey a lawful order
(two instances). You were then advised that your command was
processing you for administrative separation with an undesirable
characterization of service due to misconduct. You waived your
procedural right to have your case heard by an administrative
discharge board (ADB). On 11 May 1954, you received the
undesirable characterization of service due to unfitness.
In its review of your application, the Board carefully
considered all potentially mitigating factors, such as your
youth, family problems, and current desire to upgrade your
discharge. The Board conciuded, however, that your discharge
should not be changed due to your misconduct. The Board noted
that you waived your right to an ADB, your best opportunity for
, retention or a better characterization of service. You are
j; advised that no discharge is upgraded based merely on 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,
ROBERT D. ZSALMAN
Acting Executive Director
Enclosure
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 | NR6076 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 June 2014. However, the Board concluded that your discharge should not be “upgraded due to your numerous 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 | NR3231-13
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. On 5S March 1963, you received an 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.
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 | NR3571-13
A-three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your ‘application on 11 February 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, . On 5...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR5838 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application 28 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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR6869 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 | CY2011 | 12499 11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 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. 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 | NR5308 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application 14 May 2014. On 22 January 1991, 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 is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR3589-13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19. 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 material...