DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
SON
Docket No: 10278-0959
26 July 2010
Dear Samnaenlett,
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 22 July 2010. 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 the evidence submitted was insufficient
to establish the existence of probable material error or
injustice.
You enlisted in the Marine Corps and began a period of active
duty on 1 October 1965. The Board found that on 7 November 1966
and 29 December 1967, you received nonjudicial punishment (NUP)
for making a false official statement and two instances of
unauthorized absence (UA) totaling three days. On 4 October
1968, you were convicted by civil authorities of uttering seven
bad checks and sentenced to seven months confinement. On
8 November 1968, you were notified of pending administrative
separation action by reason of misconduct due to civil
conviction. You elected to make a statement, but waived your
rights to consult with counsel or have your case heard by a board
of officers. You were returned to military control on
9 February 1969. On 14 March 1969, you received a third NUP for
four periods of UA totaling 260 days. Your case was forwarded
and it was directed that you receive an undesirable discharge by
reason of misconduct due to civil conviction. You were so
discharged on 17 March 1969.
On 16 June 1977, a panel of the Naval Discharge Review Board
(NDRB), convened under the Special Discharge Review Program
(SDRP) and upgraded your undesirable discharge to a general
discharge under special criteria.
It appears that while seeking assistance through the Department
of Veterans Affairs (DVA), you were informed that benefits could
not be provided to those individuals whose undesirable discharges
were upgraded under SDRP. Your discharge was again reviewed, but
NDRB declined to take any further corrective action that would
make you eligible for veterans’ benefits.
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, military
record, and service in Vietnam. Nevertheless, the Board
concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your discharge because of your misconduct
that resulted in three NUP’s and conviction by civil authorities
of serious offenses. Accordingly, 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,
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 02044-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 August 2000. 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. on 9 March 1969, you were On 15 December 1969 you received NJP for a two pay period punishment imposed was restriction for seven days and You were sentenced...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 12117-10
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, neither the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) nor Department of Defense (DoD) considers an upgrade to a general discharge by the SDRP to entitle you to any benefits denied by reason of the original discharge. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 05885-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 March 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 | NR2151-13
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 29 July 1970, you submitted a written request for a good of the service discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for two periods of UA totaling 181 days. Your request for discharge was granted and on 11 August 1970, you received an undesirable discharge for the good of the service in lieu...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00458-11
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. Your record reflects that on 12 August 1977, under the Department of Defense Discharge (DOD) Special Discharge Review Program (SDRP), the characterization of your undesirable discharge was changed to general under honorable conditions. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR3686 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 April 2014. On 20 June 1977 a panel of the Naval Discharge Review Board {NDRB}, convened under the Special Discharge Review Program (SDRP) and upgraded your undesirable discharge to general under honorable conditions. the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your misconduct that resulted in an...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 05465-09
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. During the period of 3 December 1968 to 13 March 1969, awaiting convening authority’s action on the SPCM, you commenced a seven day period of UA. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07518-00
he had been granted an honorable discharge by the Department of the Navy, but that this decision was reversed by the Marine Corps. b. Mr. documentation that the patient manifested symptoms of PTSD immediately following his return from Vietnam, and that these symptoms led to the patient's undesirable discharge in 1970. result of the patient's Vietnam combat experiences.
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 | CY2010 | 01433-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 October 2010. 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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of your repetitive...