Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 12499 11
Original file (12499 11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490

 

TUR
Docket No: 12499-11
4 October 2012

 

This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10, 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 2 October 2012. The names and votes of the
members of the panel will be furnished upon request. 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 on 29 January 1970 at age 17 and
served for about five months without disciplinary incident.
However, during the period from 29 July to 14 October 1970 you
received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on four occasions for two
specifications of disobedience, two periods of unauthorized
absence (UA) totalling three days, and two periods of failure to
go to your appointed place of duty.

On 26 February 1971 you received NJP for disobedience and were
awarded restriction for 14 days and a $31 forfeiture of pay. On
26 April 1971 you were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM)
of two periods of UA totalling four days, two specifications of
assault, and failure to obey a lawful order. In August 1971 you
were counselled regarding your repeated periods of UA, and were
recommended for participation in a Drug Exemption Program.
However, you decline to participation in the program and on 23
August 1971 began another period of UA. About four months later,
on 20 December 1971, you were convicted by special court-martial
(SPCM) of three periods of UA totalling 79 days. You were
sentenced to confinement at hard labor for two months and a $300
forfeiture of pay. Shortly thereafter, on 22 December 1971, you
were not granted an exemption under a Drug Exemption Program
because you did not voluntarily reveal your drug use prior to
admission and treatment for heroin withdrawal.

Subsequently, you were processed for an administrative separation
by reason of unfitness due to frequent involvement of a
discreditable nature with military authorities. After consulting
with legal counsel you elected your right to present your case to
an administrative discharge board (ADB). On 25 January 1972 an
ADB recommended an undesirable discharge by reason of unfitness
due to frequent involvement of a discreditable nature with
Military authorities. Your commanding officer, in concurrence
with the ADB, also recommended an undesirable discharge by reason
of unfitness. On 26 January 1972 the discharge authority
approved these recommendations and directed your commanding
officer to issue you an undesirable discharge by reason of
unfitness and on 9 February 1972 you were so discharged.

Your record reflects that on 22 June 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. However, this
recharacterization does not entitle you to benefits administered
by the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA). Subsequently, as
required by Public Law 95-126, the Navy Discharge Review Board
(NDRB) determined that you did not qualify for an upgrade of your
discharge under uniform standards and denied your request to
upgrade your general discharge. However, the characterization of
the discharge you received from the SDRP was not changed. As
such, you were advised that the NDRB had not affirmed your
discharge and that you might be ineligible for veterans'
benefits.

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully considered all mitigating factors, such as your youth,
desire to upgrade your discharge so that you may receive
veterans' benefits, and the statements in support of your case.
Nevertheless, the Board found the evidence and materials
submitted were not sufficient to warrant any favorable action
given your frequent misconduct which resulted in five NUPs and
two courts-martial. The Board noted that your characterization
of service was changed to general under honorable conditions
under the provisions of SDRP, but concluded that a further change
was not warranted. Accordingly, your application has been
denied.
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,

Wd, Bean

W. DEAN PFEVFRFE
Executive Dite

Similar Decisions

  • 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 | 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 | 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 | CY2010 | 10254-10

    Original file (10254-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 July 2011. 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 | CY2004 | 09154-04

    Original file (09154-04.rtf) 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.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 on 13 July 1970 at age 17 and served for a year without disciplinary...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 05685-06

    Original file (05685-06.rtf) 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.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 on 4 January 1980 at age 17 with parental consent. However, on 6 and 20...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08013-07

    Original file (08013-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 October 2008. 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 | 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 | CY2001 | 02231-00

    Original file (02231-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 September 2000. 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 and applicable statutes, regulations, thereof, your naval record, and policies. Given all the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 07244-08

    Original file (07244-08.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. In connection with this processing, you acknowledged that separation could result in an undesirable discharge (UD) and waived the right to have your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB). Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden...