Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700521

Original file (ND0700521.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-SA, USN
ND07-00521

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20070308 CharacterizationReceived:

Narrative Reason: IN LIEU OF TRIAL BY COURT MARTIAL Authority: MILPERSMAN 1910-106

Applicant’s Request:      Characterization change to:
                           Narrative Reason change to:
Applicant’s Issues:       1. Re-enlistment
                           2. Isolated incident, rash decision
                           3. Post-service conduct

Decision

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall IN LIEU OF TRIAL BY COURT MARTIAL .

Date: 20 071115    Location: Washington D.C        R epresentation :

Discussion

Issue(s) 1: 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. The Applicant is directed to the Addendum regarding .

Issue 2 ( ). The record clearly demonstrates that the Applicant submitted a request for administrative separation in lieu of trial by courts-martial for offenses for which a punitive discharge is authorized upon conviction at special or general court-martial. The request is complete and proper on its face. The evidence of record does not demonstrate that the Applicant was not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions.

Issue 3 ( ). 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 the service. The NDRB is authorized to consider outstanding post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge 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 review. After a complete review of the entire record, including the evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board determined that the discharge was appropriate and that the evidence of post-service conduct was found not to mitigate the conduct which precipitated the 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, M edical and Service Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found that

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive: US N R (DEP)      20010320 - 20010328              Active:
Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment: 200103 29      Years Contracted : ; Extension: Date of Discharge: 20020322
Length of Service : 00 Yrs 11 Mths 24 D ys                   Lost Time : Days UA: 252 Days Confine d :
Education Level:                  Age at Enlistment:                AFQT: 75                   Highest Rank /Rate : SA
Evaluation marks (# of occasions):       N/A                                Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): NONE

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

20010 619 :        Applicant to unauthorized absence .

20011219:        Applicant returned to military aut hority at NACIC Great Lakes, IL (183 days/surrendered) .

20011219:        Applicant to unauthorized absence.

20020226:        Applicant from unauthorized absence (69 days/apprehended).

Discharge Process

Charge(s) Preferred: 20020307
Charge(s) and Specification(s):
         Article 86 (2 specifications) : (1) Unauthorized absence from 20010619 - 20011219, and 20011219 - 20020226.

Date Applicant Submitted SILT request:            2002 0307
         Consulted with or Waived Counsel:
         Acknowledged Understanding Elements:
         Acknowledged Guilt to:                     Article(s) 86
                  BCD/DD authorized for offense(s)
         Acknowledged Consequences of OTH:
         Type of Characterization Requested:      NONE

Commanding Officer Recommendation (date):
Separation Authority (date):     CO, T PU , GREAT LAKES ( 20020313 )
         Reason for Discharge directed:
         Characterization directed:
Date Applicant Discharged:                         20020322

Types of Documents Submitted by Applicant and Considered By Board

Related to Military Service:      Service and/or Medical Record:          Other Records:

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

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

Pertinent Regulation/Law

A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 29, effective 11 July 2000 until 21 August 2002,
Article 1910-106, SEPARATION IN LIEU OF TRIAL BY COURT-MARTIAL.

B. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part IV, Para 403m(7)(b), Presumption Concerning Court-Martial Specifications .

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 86, Absence without leave (more than 30 days) .

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, provi ded 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 grante d 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.

Employmen t / 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 | ND0601135

Original file (ND0601135.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-SA, USNND06-01135Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request: Application Received: 20060829Characterization of Service: Narrative Reason for Separation: Discharge Authority: MILPERSMAN1910-106Last Duty Assignment/Command at Discharge: TPU GREAT LAKESApplicant’s Request: Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Review Requested: Representation: Issues (as summarized by NDRB):1. Elements of Discharge: [REQUESTED BY MEMBER] Discharge Process: Voluntary: Requested by MemberDate...
NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700649

Original file (ND0700649.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Medical and Service Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found that Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USNR (DEP) 20010730 - 20010809 Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20010809 Years Contracted:; Extension: Date of Discharge: 20020226Length of Service: 0 Yrs 6 Mths 18 Dys Lost Time: Days UA: Days...
NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0601084

Original file (ND0601084.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-DC3, USNND06-01084Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request: Application Received: 20060816Narrative Reason for Separation: IN LIEU OF TRIAL BY COURT MARTIALCharacter of Service:Discharge Authority: MILPERSMAN1910-106Last Duty Assignment/Command at Discharge: USS LAKE ERIE (CG 70)Applicant’s Request:Narrative Reason change to:None ReQUESTEDCharacterization change to:Review Requested:Representation: Issues (as summarized by NDRB): 1. Elements of Discharge: [REQUESTED BY MEMBER] Discharge...
NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200807

Original file (ND1200807.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The NDRB acknowledges his innocence of the civilian charge of murder, however, from his DD Form 214, it appears the Navy referred charges to a Special or General Court-Martial, likely for the charge of violating UCMJ Article 86 (Absence without leave). 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000175

Original file (ND1000175.rtf) Auto-classification: 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 . ” 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700105

Original file (ND0700105.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

In so choosing, the record also demonstrates that the Applicant had the opportunity to review the evidence against him, discuss that evidence and his options with detailed defense counsel, and admitted guilt to the charge against him in order to avoid such a trial. 20050926 Consulted with or Waived Counsel: Acknowledged Understanding Elements: Acknowledged Guilt to: Article(s) 80 BCD/DD authorized for offense(s) Acknowledged Consequences of OTH: Type of Characterization...
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101766

Original file (ND1101766.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)19991113 - 19991213Active:USNR (DEP)20000606 - 20000622 Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20000623Age at Enlistment:Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20030319Highest Rank/Rate:ANLength of Service:Years Month25 DaysEducation Level:AFQT: 57EvaluationMarks:Performance:3.0(2)Behavior:2.5(2)OTA: 2.75Awards and Decorations...
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101837

Original file (ND1101837.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...
NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700212

Original file (ND0700212.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Applicant’s Issues:1. 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 no evidence that the Applicant’s discharge was fair.When a Sailor’s service has been honest and faithful, it is appropriate to characterize that service under honorable...
NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0601033

Original file (ND0601033.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Service Record Entries Related to Characterization of Service or Narrative Reason for Separation 20020102: Applicant to unauthorized absence at 1800 on 20020102.20020907: Applicant from unauthorized absence at 0150 on 20020907 (248 days/surrendered).20020909: Charges preferred for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) Article 86: Unauthorized absence (UA) from 1800, 20020101 until 0150, 20020907.20020909: Applicant requested an administrative discharge under other than...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700521

Similar Decisions