Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700035

Original file (ND0700035.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

FOR
ex-AR, USN
ND07-00035

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request:

Application Received:                               20 061002
         Characterization of Service:
         Reason for Discharge :                      -
         Discharge Authority :                       MILPERSMAN 3630600
         Duty Assignment/ Command at Discharge:    USS ABRAHAM LINCOLN (CVN-72)

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

Applicant Issues :
1 . Youth and immaturity
2. Post service .
Decision:

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

Date of Decision:                                            20 070816
Location of Board:                                  Washington D.C.
Complete Service Record:                                    YES
Complete Medical Record:                           NO
Complete Discharge Package:                        YES

Regarding propriety, the Board found the discharge:
Regarding equity, the Board found the discharge:

Issue 1 (Equity): The Applicant contends that his misconduct while in the Navy is attribut able to his youth and immaturity at the time. While he may feel that immaturity was the underlying cause, the record clearly reflects the Applicant’s willful misconduct and demonstrated that he was unfit for further service. The evidence of record did not show that the Applicant was either not responsible for his conduct , or that he should not be held accountable for his actions. When a member’s service has been honest and faithful, it is appropriate to characterize that service under honorable conditions. An under other than honorable conditions discharge is warranted when significant negative aspects of a member’s conduct or performance of duty outweigh the positive aspects of the member’s military record. The Applicant’s service was marred by a nonjudicial punishment (Captains Mast) for violation of six (6) Articles of the Uniform Code of Military Justice : Art 86, Unauthorized Absence; Art 91, D isrespect to a petty officer; Art 92, Failure to obey a lawful order; Art 134, Threat, communicating; and two specifications of Art 112a, Wrongful use of a controlled substance (marijuana). Five of these are considered serious offense s for which a punitive discharge would have been authorized if adjudge d by a Special or General Court- Martial. An upgrade to under honorable conditions would therefore be inappropriate in this case .

Issue 2 (Equity): The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in deciding whether to re-characterize a discharge. However, there is no law or regulation providing that an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time, good conduct, or favorable endorsements in the civilian life subsequent to leaving the service. Ordinarily, the NDRB must find that a procedural impropriety or inequity existed during the period of enlistment in question before it can grant relief. Outstanding post-service conduct is considered by the NDRB to the extent that such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the Applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under re view. The Applicant provided only one general letter of recommendation as documentation of his post-service accomplishments and conduct. The Applicant's efforts need to be more encompassing. For example, the Applicant could have produced evidence of continuing educational pursuits, a verifiable employment record, documentation of community service, evidence of drug free existence, and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities. The Board determined that the documentation provided by the Applicant did not mitigate the misconduct that resulted in the characterization of his discharge.

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)                                19941031 - 19941113
Active:

Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment:                                 19941114
Years Contracted :                                   ; Extension:
Date of Discharge:                                  19951113
Length of Service
         Active:                                     01 Yrs 00 Mths 00 D ys ( d oes not exclude lost time)
         Inactive:                                            NONE
         Time Lost During This Period:             Days UA: Days Confinement:

Education Level:
Age at this Enlistment:
AFQT:                                                 37
Highest Rate/Rank:                                   AR
Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):
                                    Performance : 1.0 ( 1 ) Behavior : 1.0 ( 1 ) OTA : 1.0

Awards and Decorations (as listed on the DD Form 214): NATIONAL DEFENSE SERVICE MEDAL

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

19950715 :        NJP for violation(s) of UCMJ:
         Article 86 : UA from appointed place of duty.
         Article 91: Disrespect to a petty officer.
         Article 92: Failure to obey a lawful order by missing liberty risk muster.
         Article 134: Communicated a threat.
         Article 112a : (2 specs), Wrongful use of marijuana.
         Award: Forfeiture of $ 427 .00 for 2 month s , restriction and extra duty for 45 days .
         No indic ation of appeal in the record.

19950802:        Medical Officer’s drug and alcohol evaluation determined applicant drug dependent.

19950802:        Applicant declined Level III treatment for drug dependency .

Elements of Discharge: [INVOLUNTARY]

Date Notified :                                        19950726
Reason for Discharge     -
         -

Least Favorable Characterization Authorized :

Date Applicant R esponded to N otification:                 19950726
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):        ( 19950808 )
Separation Authority (date):      BUPERS WASHINGTON DC ( 19950912 )
         Reason for discharge directed :             -
         Characterization directed:
Discharge Held in Abeyance Pending
Art 32 Investigation                               BUPERS WASHINGTON ( message dtd 19951012)
Date Applicant Discharged:                         19951113

Additional Documents Submitted by Applicant and Considered By Board

Total Number of Pages:                               10

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)             Staging Application Detail Form

Pertinent Regulation/Law

A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 9, effective
22 Jul 94 until 02 Oct 96, Article 3630600, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL 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 s 91, 92, 112a, 134 .

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. 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

NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0601208

Original file (ND0601208.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Elements of Discharge: [INVOLUNTARY] Discharge Process: Date Notified:20000318Reason for Discharge - Least Favorable Characterization Authorized: Date Applicant Responded to Notification: 20000318Rights Elected at Notification:Consult with Counsel Obtain Copies of Documents Submit Statement(s) (date)Administrative Board GCMCA Review Commanding Officer Recommendation (date): (20000322)Separation Authority (date):COMMANDER, CRUISER DESTROYE GROUP TWO (20000412)Reason for discharge directed: -...
NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0601205

Original file (ND0601205.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

]19990602: NJP for violation of UCMJ: Article 112a(Wrongful use of controlled substance, cocaine) Elements of Discharge: [INVOLUNTARY] Date Notified: NOT FOUND IN RECORDReason for Discharge Least Favorable Characterization Authorized: Date Applicant Responded to Notification: NOT FOUND IN RECORDRights Elected at Notification:Consult with Counsel Obtain Copies of Documents Submit Statement(s) (date)Administrative Board SEPARATION CODE INDICATES WAIVEDGCMCA Review Administrative Board Date...
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900483

Original file (MD0900483.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

” 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. Additionally, the Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities. 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0601202

Original file (ND0601202.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Board determined that the documentation provided by the Applicant did not mitigate the misconduct which resulted in the Applicant’s characterization of service at discharge. Elements of Discharge: [INVOLUNTARY] Date Notified:199100909Reason for Discharge due to: Least Favorable Characterization Authorized: OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONSDate Applicant Responded to Notification: 19910909Rights Elected at Notification:Consult with Counsel Administrative Board Obtain Copies Submit...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801831

Original file (ND0801831.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Board determined the awarded discharge characterization 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 Pertinent Regulation/Law A. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the...
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...
NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200506

Original file (ND1200506.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends he should have been discharged with a medical disability and not a Pattern of Misconduct. Relief denied.Summary: 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900903

Original file (ND0900903.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. However the NDRB determined the narrative reason to be most appropriate based on the three NJPs and one retention warning awarded to the Applicant.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, and discharge process, the Board found However, the Board determined there was sufficient evidence to support...
NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600992

Original file (ND0600992.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Medical Record Entries Related to Characterization of Service or Narrative Reason for Separation Record not available. 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. With respect to a discharge adjudged by a court-martial, the action of the NDRB is restricted to upgrades based on clemency.
NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200447

Original file (ND1200447.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. Relief denied.Summary: 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 .Since 15 years have elapsed since the date of his discharge, the Applicant is not eligible...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700035

Similar Decisions