Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700578

Original file (ND0700578.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-CTA2(SW), USN
ND07-00578

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20070330 Characterization Received:

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

Applicant’s Request:      Characterization change to:
                           Narrative Reason change to:
Applicant’s Issues:       1. Discharge was inequitable because there was a delay of Command level action
                           2. Service Record


Decision

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

Date: 20 080110             Location: Washington D.C          R epresentation :

Discussion

Issue 1: ( ). The Applicant contends that his discharge was inequitable because of the 10 month delay between the infractions and his discharge. The Board found the Applicant’s service record incomplete and therefore presumes regularity on the part of the government. Sailors may be separated upon their request in lieu of trial by special or general courts-martial if charges have been preferred with respect to an offense for which a punitive discharge is authorized and it has been determined that the Sailor is unqualified for future military service. The Applicant, after consultation with Defense Coun sel , voluntarily signed the request to be separated and acknowledged that he would receive and Other than Honorable characterization of service.

Issue 2: ( ). When a Sailor ’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 conduct during the current period of service, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service was marred his admission of violating the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) , Articles 121 (Larceny) and Article 123 (Uttering checks with insufficient funds). Violation of UCMJ Article s 121 and 123 are considered serious offenses for which a punitive discharge is authorized if adjudged by a Special or General Courts Martial. An upgrade to general (under honorable conditions) would be inappropriate.

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, Medical and Service Record Entries , Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found th at

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive: US N R (DEP)      20010224 - 20010520              Active:
Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment: 20010521      Years Contracted : ; Extension: Date of Discharge: 20060825
Length of Service : 5 Yrs 3 Mths 4 D ys     Lost Time : Days UA: Days Confine d :
Education Level:         Age at Enlistment:       AFQT: 32          Highest Rank /Rate :
Evaluation marks (# of occasions):       Performance: 4.0 ( 3 )       Behavior: 3.33 ( 3 )         OTA: 3.46
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): Navy Marine Corps Achievement Medal, Combat Action Ribbon, Navy Unit Commendation (2), Meritorious Unit COmmendation (2), Navy "E" Ribbon, Navy Good Conduct Medal, Navy Expeditionary Medal (2), National Defense Service Medal

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

NONE FOUND IN RECORD

Discharge Process

Charge(s) Preferred: UNKNOWN
Charge(s) and Specification(s): NOT FOUND IN RECORD


Date Applicant Submitted SILT request:            20060725
         Consulted with or Waived Counsel:
         Acknowledged Understanding Elements:
         Acknowledged Guilt to:                     Article(s) 121 (Larceny), 123 (Uttering Checks with insufficient funds)
                  BCD/DD authorized for offense(s)
         Acknowledged Consequences of OTH:
         Type of Characterization Requested:

Commanding Officer Recommendation (date):        ( 20060806 )
Separation Authority (date):                       Commanding Officer, NIOC, Georgia (20060821)
         Reason for Discharge directed:
         Characterization directed:
Date Applicant Discharged :                         20060825

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 11, effective 31 May 2005 and Present, 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 . 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 .

D . 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 121 and 123.

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 | 2011_Navy | ND1101043

Original file (ND1101043.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

In fairness to those service members, commanders and separation authorities are tasked to ensure that undeserving Sailors receive no higher characterization than is due.There is no evidence in the record, nor did the Applicant provide any documentation, to indicate he attempted to use the numerous services available for service members who undergo personal and family problems during their enlistments, such as Navy Chaplains, medical or mental health professionals, Navy Relief Society, Family...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801815

Original file (ND0801815.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Board determined the characterization of service received, “Under Other Than Honorable Conditions”, was an appropriate characterization considering the length of service and the UCMJ violations involved, and based on the limited post service documentation provided 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501019

Original file (ND0501019.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant requests her characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 19930205 - 19930524 COG Active: USN 19930525 - 19960710 HON Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 19960711 Date of Discharge: 20010427 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 04 09 17 (Does not exclude lost time.) I most strongly recommend that...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801883

Original file (ND0801883.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant has requested an upgrade to his discharge due to the fact his post service conduct shows he has changed and become a productive citizen in his community.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. The Board determined the Applicant post service conduct did not warrant an upgrade to“Honorable” however; it was...
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101706

Original file (ND1101706.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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 .The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing for 15 years from the date of discharge. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a...
USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0800482

Original file (MD0800482.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Sentence – RIR to E-5RESTR 60 days.6105 Counseling: 20030723: For Adultery Types of Documents SubmittedRelated to Military Service: DD 214: Service and/or Medical Record: Other Records: Related to Post-Service Period: Employment: Finances: Education/Training: Health/Medical Records: Substance Abuse: Criminal Records: Family/Personal Status: Community Service: References: Additional Statements From Applicant: From Representation: From Member of Congress: Other Documentation (Describe)...
USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700070

Original file (MD0700070.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

After a thorough review of the Applicant’s record, issues submitted, and post service accomplishments, the Board determined that clemency was not warranted and that the sentence awarded the Applicant at his court-martial, as approved, was appropriate for the offenses he committed.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. ...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900416

Original file (ND0900416.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The NDRB reviews discharges on a case-by-case basis and no evidence can be found in the Applicant’s service record to support his statement. The NDRB is not reviewing other service member’s misconduct or administrative or disciplinary actions against them. 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...
USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1301500

Original file (MD1301500.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. ” 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 to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities.
NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600466

Original file (ND0600466.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Decisional Issues: Equity: Isolated incidentImpropriety/Equity: Dual punishment and disproportionate Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant’s DD Form 214 (Service 2) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive:...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700578

Similar Decisions