Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 06860-11
Original file (06860-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

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

 

SON .
Docket No: 06860-1411
2 November 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 seseion, considered your ,
application on i November 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 Navy and began a period of active duty on

17 January 1967. The Board found that you received five
nonjudicial punishments (NJP‘s} for breach of the peace
(fighting), two instances of communicating a threat, two
instances of disobedience, two instances of failure to go to your
appointed place of duty, and disrespect. Additionally, you were
counseled and warned after your second NJP, that further
misconduct could result in administrative discharge action.
Subsequently, you were notified of pending administrative
separation action. You waived your rights to consult with
counsel, submit a statement or have your case heard by an
administrative discharge board (ADB). On 4 September 1968, your
commanding officer forwarded your case: and recommended that you
receive an undesirable discharge by reason of unfitness due to
your frequently involvement with military authorities. The
separation authority concurred and directed that you receive an
undesirable discharge due to unfitness. You were 80 discharged
on 10 January 1969.
On 24 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 the criteria of SDRP. Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA)
benefits are not to be provided to those individuals whose
undesirable discharges were upgraded under SDRP.

The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, record of
service, and issues you are having with the DVA. Nevertheless,
the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your discharge given your misconduct that
resulted in five NOP’s. Finally, the Board noted that you
received a general discharge under the SDRP. 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. The Board concluded that a
further change, which would make you eligible for DVA benefits,
was not warranted. If you have been denied benefits, you should
appeal that denial under procedures established by the DVA.
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,

\y Deas?

W. DEAN ‘PFET
Executive Di t

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 12117-10

    Original file (12117-10.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. 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 | 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 | 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 | 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 | CY2009 | 10278-09

    Original file (10278-09.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 case was forwarded and it was directed that you receive an undesirable discharge by reason of misconduct due to civil conviction. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 07538-09

    Original file (07538-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 May 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. 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 | 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 | CY2001 | 04899-01

    Original file (04899-01.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 November 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. After review by the discharge authority, the On 4 November 1977 the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) changed the characterization of the discharge to general...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06670-01

    Original file (06670-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Your military record shows that on 23 April 1971 you submitted a written request for an undesirable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for this 239 day period of unauthorized absence. requesting that original DD Form 214 issued on 2 June 1971 and the information on the SDRP 214 be corrected by removing all entries showing that you originally received an undesirable discharge. were not sufficient to warrant further recharacterization of your discharge or a confirmation of...