DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION CF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
BJG
Docket No: 7715-13
20 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 19 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.
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 27
November 1951. You received Captain’s Mast on six occasions and
were convicted by a special court-martial. Your offenses
included unauthorized absence (three periods totaling two days),
failure to go to your appointed place of duty (two instances),
inappropriate standing of watch, and larceny. 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 27 November 1953,
you were discharged with an undesirable characterization of
service due to misconduct.
In its review of your application, the Board carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, Korean
war service, and current desire to upgrade your discharge.
However, the Board concluded that your discharge should not be
upgraded due to your acts of misconduct. You are advised that
no discharge is upgraded due merely to the passage of time or
spost service good conduct. In view of the above, your
application has been denied. The names and votes of the members
é6f 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. “SALMAN
Acting Executive Director
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 | NR1458 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 January 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 | 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 | 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 | 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 | NR5007 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application 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 | NR7227 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. Subsequently, your case was forwarded and you received an undesirable discharge on 11 July 1975, The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, record of service, desire to upgrade your discharge and contention that...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR4391 13
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 husband’s 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR2238-13
A three-member panel of the Board Records, sitting in executive sess application on 11 February 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 material error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01827-10
You elected to have your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB) that found you had committed misconduct, and recommended a UD due to unfitness. You received the UD due to unfitness on 29 January 1957. 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.