Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 12117-10
Original file (12117-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

SION
Docket No: 12117-1090
25 August 2011

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 23 August 2011. 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 28 July 1969. The Board found that you received four
nonjudicial punishments (NIP's) for unauthorized absence (UA),
wrongful possession of a liberty card, three instances of
disobedience, and absence from your appointed place of duty. You
were convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) of absence from
your appointed place of duty and two specifications of
disobedience. Further, you were convicted by two summary courts-
martial (SCM’s) of two periods of UA totaling 54 days,
disobedience, and sleeping on post. Subsequently, you were
notified of pending administrative separation. You waived your
rights to consuit with counsel, submit a statement or have your
case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB). On

11 August 1971, your commanding officer forwarded your case
recommending that you receive an undesirable discharge by reason
of misconduct due to frequent involvement. On 26 August 1971,
the separation authority approved the recommendation of the
commanding officer for an undesirable discharge. You were so
discharged on 3 September 1971. On 19 July 1977, a panel of the
Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) convened under the Special
Discharge Review Program (SDRP), and your initial discharge was
changed to a general under honorable conditions under the
criteria of the SDRP.

The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and
Vietnam service. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors
were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your
discharge given your misconduct that resulted in four NUP's, a
SPCM conviction, and convictions by two SCM’s of serious
offenses. Finally, the Board noted that you received a general
discharge under the SDRP. 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. The
Board concluded that a further change, which would make you
eligible for DVA benefits, was not warranted. 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,

  
 

W. DEAN PF
Executive D

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 12499 11

    Original file (12499 11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2011 | 00458-11

    Original file (00458-11.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. 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 | NR2151-13

    Original file (NR2151-13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2001 | 02044-00

    Original file (02044-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2013 | NR3686 13

    Original file (NR3686 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 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 | CY2013 | NR5616 13

    Original file (NR5616 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 3 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. The Board concluded that you received the benefit of your bargain with the Marine Corps when you were discharged at your request rather than being...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04596-00

    Original file (04596-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 September 2001. 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. January 1968 you received NJP for a 14 day period of UA and were awarded a $20 forfeiture of pay. Given the circumstances of your case, the Board concluded...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 06860-11

    Original file (06860-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive seseion, considered your , application on i November 2011. However, neither the DVA nor the Department of Defense considers a general discharge issued by the SDRP to entitle you to any benefits denied by the original discharge. 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 | CY2002 | 05149-01

    Original file (05149-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 January 2001. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. Your record also reflects that on 9 December 1974 you submitted a written request for an undesirable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for two periods of UA totalling four days, absence from your...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 09067-09

    Original file (09067-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    You also were convicted by three summary courts-martial (SCM) of two periods of UA, two specifications of Gisobedience, and absence from your appointed place of duty. You were notified of pending administrative separation action and an administrative discharge board (ADB) recommended that you be discharge from the service with an undesirable discharged due to unfitness. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...