DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
SON
Docket No: 03686-13
24 April 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 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. 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 30 April 1969. The Board found that on 30 January 1970,
you were convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) of 80 days of
unauthorized absence (UA). You were sentenced to confinement at
hard labor and a reduction in paygrade. On 25 February 1970, you
began another period of UA that lasted 146 days, ending on
21 July 1970, during a time of war. On 4 September 1970, you
submitted a written request for a good of the service discharge
in order to avoid trial by court-martial for 146 days of UA.
Prior to submitting this request for discharge, you conferred
with a qualified military lawyer, were advised of your rights,
and were warned of the probable adverse consequences of accepting
such a discharge. Your request for discharge was granted and on
8 January 1971, you received an undesirable discharge for the
good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. Asa
result of this action, you were spared the stigma of a court-
martial conviction and the potential penalties of a punitive
discharge and confinement at hard labor.
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. Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA)
benefits are not 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, legal documents pertaining. to the expunging of your
civil criminal records, and desire to upgrade your discharge.
Nevertheless,. the Board concluded these factors were not
sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given
your misconduct that resulted in an SPCM conviction of a lengthy
period of UA, charges being preferred to a court-martial for a
period of UA totaling over four months, and request for
discharge. 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,
TRAD & ae
ROBERT D. SALMAN
Acting Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR5616 13
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 | 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 | 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 | CY2001 | 06670-01
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...
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 | CY2002 | 05828-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 February 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. discharge. However, the Board found the evidence and materials submitted were not sufficient to warrant favorable action given your lengthy period of UA.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04596-00
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 | CY2002 | 08399-02
A three—member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 February 2003. On 10 June 1977 the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) changed the characterization of the discharge to general under the provisions of the Special Discharge Review Program (SDRP). 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 | 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 | CY2001 | 01211-01
Your A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Navy Records, sitting in executive session, 25 July 2001. reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. However, you continued to serve and were advanced to LCPL You reported to duty in Vietnam on 5 October 1968. On 28 August 1970 the discharge authority directed You were Prior to submitting this request court- The record further reflects that on 20 June 1977 the...