Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0601210

Original file (ND0601210.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-SHSR, USN
ND06-01210

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received:                               20 060921
         Characterization of Service:
         Reason for Discharge :                      -
         Discharge Authority :                       MILPERSMAN 1910-142
         Duty Assignment/ Command at Discharge:    USS THEODORE ROOSEVELT CVN-71

Applicant’s Request:
         Characterization change to:
         Narrative Reason change to:               YES
         Review Requested:
         Representation:

Applicant’s i ssues (as summarized by NDRB):
1. Administrative separation processing did not comply with applicable regulations.

Decision

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
By a vote of the Reason for Discharge shall - .

Date of Decision:                                            20 070816
Location of Board:                                  Washington D.C.
Complete Service Record:
Complete Medical Record:
Complete Discharge Package:
Regarding propriety, the Board found the discharge:
Regarding equity, the Board found the discharge:

Discussion

Issue 1 ( ). The Applicant claims that he was processed for administrative separation for alcohol rehabilitation failure and that he received a failure waiver. The Board noted that, per his DD 214, the Applicant was separated for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense. A waiver of an alcohol rehabilitation treatment failure does not preclude discharge for misconduct. The Board noted that a factual basis for misconduct, commission of a serious offense, was in the record. In the absence of the discharge package, the Board presumed that the Applicant was properly notified regarding administrative separation, that the Applicant exercised, or waived, his rights, and that appropriate authority determined that separation was appropriate in accordance with applicable regulations.

In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of Government affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Service Record Entries, Medical Record Entries, Elements of Discharge and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found the Applicant’s discharge proper and equitable.

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive: USNR (DEP)                                20040506 - 20040531
Active:

Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment:                                 20040601
Years Contracted :                                   ; Extension:
Date of Discharge:                                  20051117
Length of Service
         Active:                                     1 Yrs 4 Mths 23 D ys ( d oes not exclude lost time)
         Inactive:                                            Yrs Mths D ys
         Time Lost During This Period:             Days UA: 22 Days Confinement:

Education Level:
Age at this Enlistment:
AFQT:                                                 42
Highest Rate/Rank:                                   SHSA

Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):
                                    Performance : 4.0 ( 2 ) Behavior : 4.0 ( 2 ) OTA : 3.66

Awards and Decorations (as listed on the DD Form 214): NATIONAL DEFENSE SERVICE MEDAL, GLOBAL WAR ON TERRORISM SERVICE MEDAL, GLOBAL WAR ON TERRORISM EXPEDITIONARY MEDAL

Medical/Service Record Entries Related to Characterization of Service or Reason for Discharge

20041127:        Applicant to unauthorized absence at 0700 on 20041127.

20041129:        Applicant from unauthorized absence at 0700 on 20041129 (2 days/surrendered).

20050427:        Medical entry: Evaluated for alcohol dependence.
         Diagnosis: Medical and SARP records consistent with alcohol dependence.
         Recommendation: Level III treatment.

20050522:        Applicant missed ship’s movement.

20050523 :        NJP for violation(s) of UCMJ:
         Article 86: (2 specifications) -UA from his unit on or about 20050329-20050414, 20050321-20050326.
         Article 87 : Missing ship’s movement.
         Award: R estriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to E- 1 .
                  No indication of appeal in the record.

20050523 :        Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency ( Two specifications of UA from his unit on or about 20050329-20050414 and 20050321-20050326; Missing ship’s movement through design on or about 20050322, as evidenced by CO’s NJP of 20050523 ), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

Elements of Discharge: [INVOLUNTARY]

Date Notified :                                        NOT FOUND IN RECORD
Reason for Discharge
Least Favorable Characterization Authorized :

Date Applicant R esponded to N otification:                 NOT FOUND IN RECORD
Rights E lected at N otification :
Consult with Counsel
Obtain Copies of Documents
Submit Statement(s) (date)
Administrative Board
GCMCA Review

Commanding Officer R ecommendation (date):
Separation Authority (date):      COMMANDER, NAVY REGION, MID-ATLANTIC ( 20051102 )
         Reason for discharge directed :             -
         Characterization directed:
Date Applicant Discharged:                         20051117

Additional Documents Submitted by Applicant and Considered By Board

Total Number of Pages:                               3

Related to Period of Service Under Review :
         From Service and/or Medical Record :                Other Records :

Related to Other Period (s) of Service:
         From Service and/or Medical Record:               Other Records:

Related to Post-Service Period:
         Employment:                                           Finances:
         Health/Medical Records:                            Substance Abuse:
         Family/Personal Status:                            Education:
        Community Service Efforts:                         References:
         Criminal Records:

Other:
         Additional Statements From Applicant :             From Representative:
        Other Documentation (Describe)

Pertinent Regulation/Law

A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 11, effective 26 April 2005 until Present, Article 1910-142, SEPARATION BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT - COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE .

B . Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part II , Para 211, Regularity of Government Affairs , Part V, Para 502, Propriety and Para 503, Equity .

C. The Manual for Courts-Martial authorizes the award of a punitive discharge if adjudged as part of the sentence upon conviction by a special or general court-martial for violation of the UCMJ, Article 87 , Missing movement .

ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant

Complaint Procedures : If you believe that the decision in your case is unclear, not responsive to the issues you raised, or does not otherwise comport with the decisional document requirements of DoD Instruction 1332.28, you may submit a complaint in accordance with Enclosure (5) of that Instruction to the Joint Service Review Activity, OUSD (P&R) PI-LP, The Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301-4000. You should read Enclosure (5) of the Instruction before submitting such a complaint. The complaint procedure does not permit a challenge of the merits of the decision; it is designed solely to ensure that the decisional documents meet applicable requirements for clarity and responsiveness. You may view DoD Instruction 1332.28 and other Decisional Documents by going online at “ http://Boards.law.af.mil . ”

Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years from the date of discharge. The Applicant can provide documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments or any additional evidence related to this discharge. Representation at a personal appearance hearing is recommended but not required. If a former member has been discharged for more than 15 years, has already been granted a personal appearance hearing or has otherwise exhausted his opportunities before the NDRB, the Applicant may petition the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR), 2 Navy Annex, Washington, DC 20370-5100 for further review.

Service Benefits: The Veterans Administration determines eligibility for post-service benefits, not the Naval Discharge Review Board. There is no requirement or law that grants recharacterization solely on the issue of obtaining Veterans' benefits and this issue does not serve to provide a foundation upon which the Board can grant relief.

Employment/Educational Opportunities : The Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational opportunities. Regulations limit the Board’s review to a determination of the propriety and equity of the discharge.

Reenlistment/RE-code: Since the NDRB has no jurisdiction over reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Navy, Marine Corps, or any other of the Armed Forces, the NDRB is not authorized to change a reenlistment code. Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) can make changes to reenlistment codes. Additionally, the Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities. An unfavorable “RE” code is, in itself, not a bar to reenlistment. A request for a waiver can be submitted during the processing of a formal application for reenlistment through a recruiter.

Medical Conditions and Misconduct : DoD disability regulations do not preclude a disciplinary separation. Appropriate regulations stipulate that separations for misconduct take precedence over potential separations for other reasons. Whenever a member is being processed through the Physical Evaluation Board, and subsequently is processed for an administrative involuntary separation for misconduct, the disability evaluation is suspended. The Physical Evaluation Board case remains in suspense pending the outcome of the non-disability proceedings. If the action includes either a punitive or administrative discharge for misconduct, the medical board report is filed in the member’s terminated health record. Additionally, the NDRB does not have the authority to change a narrative reason for separation to one indicating a medical disability or “PTSD.” Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records can grant this type of narrative reason change.

Automatic Upgrades - There is no law or regulation, which provides that an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in civilian life subsequent to leaving Naval service. The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge to the extent such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the Applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review. Examples of documentation that may be provided to the Board include proof of educational pursuits, verifiable employment records, documentation of community service, credible evidence of a substance free lifestyle and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities.

Issues Concerning Bad-Conduct Discharges (BCD ) – Because relevant and material facts stated in a court-martial specification are presumed by the NDRB to be established facts, issues relating to the Applicant’s innocence of charges for which he was found guilty cannot form a basis for relief. With respect to a discharge adjudged by a court-martial, the action of the NDRB is restricted to upgrades based on clemency. Clemency is an act of leniency that reduces the severity of the punishment imposed.

Board Membership: The names and votes of the members of the Board are recorded on the original of this document and may be obtained from the service records by writing to:

Secretary of the Navy Council of Review Boards
Attn: Naval Discharge Review Board
720 Kennon Street SE Rm 309
Washington Navy Yard DC 20374-5023

Similar Decisions

USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201266

Original file (MD1201266.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant also acknowledged his complete understanding of the Marine Corps Policy Concerning Illegal Use of Drugs on 5 June 2002.Despite an Article 112a violation, which requires mandatory administrative processing, the Applicant’s command allowed him to finish his enlistment, and he was discharged at his End of Active Obligated Service with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization of service.In accordance with Paragraph 1004 of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901977

Original file (ND0901977.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Without sufficient documentary evidence,the NDRB cannot form a basis of reliefSummary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, and discharge process, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reason for separation shall remain .The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing for a period of fifteen years from the date of discharge. ” Additional Reviews...
NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000788

Original file (ND1000788.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Types of Documents Submitted/reviewedRelated to Military Service: DD 214:Service/Medical Record:Other Records: Related to Post-Service Period: Employment: Finances: Education/Training: Health/Medical Records: Rehabilitation/Treatment: Criminal Records: Personal Documentation: Community Service: References: Department of VA letter: Other Documentation: Additional Statements:From Applicant: From/To Representation:From/ToCongress member: Pertinent Regulation/Law A. Relief denied.Summary: After...
USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0601002

Original file (MD0601002.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Elements of Discharge: [INVOLUNTARY] Discharge Process: Date Notified:20050321Narrative Reason(s): MISCONDUCTLeast Favorable Characterization: Commanding Officer’s Intended Recommendation: Record Supports Narrative Reason: YESDate Applicant Responded to Notification: 20050321Rights Elected at Notification:Consult with Counsel Administrative Board Obtain Copies Submit Statement(s) Recommendation of Commanding Officer (date): (20050321) SJA review (date):(20050408)Discharge directed by...
NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0601132

Original file (ND0601132.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

20000218: DD-214 issued, Applicant discharged with a service characterization of general (under honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct Elements of Discharge: [INVOLUNTARY] Date Notified:NOT FOUND IN RECORDReason for Discharge due to: Least Favorable Characterization: NOT FOUND IN RECORDDate Applicant Responded to Notification: NOT FOUND IN RECORDRights Elected at Notification:Consult with Counsel NOT FOUND IN RECORD Administrative Board Obtain Copies NOT...
NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700019

Original file (ND0700019.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Complete Service Record: Complete Medical Record: Complete Discharge Package: Regarding propriety, the Board found the discharge: Regarding equity, the Board found the discharge: Discussion Issues 1 and 2: either which the Board cannot form the basis of relief for the Applicant, or the Board does not have the authority to grant the relief for which the Applicant petitioned. Elements of Discharge: [INVOLUNTARY] Date Notified:20051117Reason for Discharge - PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT - - Least...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900411

Original file (ND0900411.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The NDRB determined the awarded discharge was appropriate and an upgrade would be inappropriate.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant Complaint Procedures : If you believe that the decision in your case is unclear, not responsive to the issues you raised, or does not otherwise comport with the decisional...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801451

Original file (ND0801451.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant is advised that completion of these items alone does not guarantee the upgrade of an unfavorable discharge, as each discharge is reviewed by the Board on a case by case basis to determine if post service conduct mitigates the reason for the characterization of discharge.At this time, the Applicant has not provided any documentation of post service performance for the Board to consider an upgrade.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s...
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101302

Original file (ND1101302.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Manual for Courts-Martial authorizes the award of a punitive discharge if adjudged as part of the sentence upon conviction by a special or general court-martial for violation of the UCMJ, Articles 87, 91, 92,and 134. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years of the Applicant’s date of discharge. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority...
NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0601015

Original file (ND0601015.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-SA, USNND06-01015Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request: Application Received: 20060725Narrative Reason for Separation: misconductCharacter of Service:Discharge Authority: MILPERSMAN 3630620Last Duty Assignment/Command at Discharge: USS JOHN C STENNIS (CVN74)Applicant’s Request:Narrative Reason change to:NONE REQUESTEDCharacterization change to:Review Requested:Representation: Decision: Date of Decision:20070614Vote (characterization/reason)/ Location of Board: Washington D.C.Complete...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0601210

Similar Decisions