Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700887

Original file (ND0700887.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-MASR, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20070621

Characterization of Service Received:

Narrative Reason for Discharge: MISCONDUCT-COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE
Authority for Discharge: MILPERSMAN 1910-142

Applicant’s Request:     Characterization change to:
                           Narrative Reason change to:

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive: US N R (DEP)      20030307 - 20031208              Active:
Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment: 20031209      Period of enlistment : Years Months    Date of Discharge: 20060623
Length of Service : Yrs Mths 15 D ys      Education Level:         Age at Enlistment:       AFQT: 71
Highest Rank /Rate : MASN Evaluation marks: Performance: 3.0 ( 2 )     Behavior: 3.5 ( 2 )          OTA: 3.16
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): Rifle Pistol NMCOSSR (2)

Periods of UA /Confinement :

NJPs :
         20041005: Art(s) 92. Awarded - . Susp - .
         200 5 090 2 : Art(s) 81, 92, 107 . Awarded - . Susp - .
         20051110 : Art(s) 134 . Awarded – RIR vacated . Susp - .

S CMs :
         20060515 : Art(s) 89, 91 (2 Specs) , 92, 134 . Sentence - .

Retention Warnings: .
         20041005 : For underage drinking, in violation of Article 92 of the UCMJ. .

Types of Documents Submitted

Related 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 Representat ion :              From Member of Congress:
Other Documentation (Describe)

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB)
DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT

Applicant’s Issues

1. Had the Applicant had received timely alcohol treatment; he could have corrected his deficiencies and continued on with a promising career.
2. Characterization of discharge was too harsh for the misconduct he committed.

Decision

Date: 20 08 0214 Location: Washington D.C R epresentation :

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall MISCONDUCT - COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE .

Discussion

Issue 1: ( ). The Applicant implies that he was not afforded timely alcohol treatment treated which resulted in the misconduct that eventually resulted in his separation from service. The government enjoys a presumption of regularity in the conduct of its affairs. The Applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support his issue. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the Applicant produced any evidence, to support the contention that he did not receive timely alcohol treatment and that if he had alcohol treatment that it would have prevented future incidents of misconduct. The Applicant’s statements alone do not overcome the government’s presumption of regularity in this case.

Issue 2: ( ). T he Board reviews the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge individually, on a case-by-case basis. If such a review reveals an impropriety or inequity, relief is in order. Regulations permit relief on equitable grounds if the Applicant’s discharge is inconsistent with standards of discipline of the Naval service. There is credible evidence in the record that the Applicant committed misconduct on numerous occasions. The evidence of record does not demonstrate that the Applicant was not responsible for h is conduct or that he should not be held accountable for h is actions . When a Sailor ’s service has been honest and faithful, it is appropriate to characterize that service under honorable conditions. A 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 one discharge warning , three nonjudicial punishments ( NJP ), and one summary court-martial in a plea agreement to avoid a Special Court-Martial for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), Article 8 1 (Conspiracy), Article 89 (Disrespect toward a superior officer), Article 91 (Insubordinate conduct toward a superior petty officer), Article 92 (Failure to obey order), Article 107 (False official statement), and Article 134 (Drunk/Disorderly). V iolation of Article s 89, 91, 92 , and 107 are considered serious offense s for which a punitive discharge is authorized if adjudged by a Special or General Courts Martial. An upgrade to honorable 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 that

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 s 89, 91, 92, and 107.

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

USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0800800

Original file (MD0800800.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

6105 Counseling: 20050718: For Misconduct, Reckless Driving 20060304: Violations of Article 92, Failure to Obey a Lawful Order; Art 113, Misbehavior of a Sentinel 20060414: Violations of Articles 91, Insubordinate Conduct; Art 107, False Official Statement 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...
USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0800376

Original file (MD0800376.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall .Discussion : 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. ” 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700217

Original file (ND0700217.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant’s summary of service clearly documents the Applicants misconduct resulting in three nonjudicial punishments for violations of UCMJ Articles 91 (insubordinate conduct), 92 (failure to obey and order or regulation, 3 specifications), 107 (false official statement) and 134 (drunk and disorderly). Awarded – FOP -$100.00 for 1 month.20041005: CO's NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art. Discharge Process Date Notified: 20060222Reason for Discharge:-- Least Favorable Characterization: Date Applicant...
USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801516

Original file (MD0801516.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Types of Documents Submitted/reviewedRelated 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): DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801259

Original file (ND0801259.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant contends his discharge should be upgraded to “Honorable ” based on his overall service which was faithful and honorable.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, Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence...
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900355

Original file (MD0900355.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Board determined the awarded discharge characterization was appropriate and an upgrade wouldbe inappropriate.The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800459

Original file (ND0800459.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Types of Documents Submitted/reviewedRelated 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) DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE...
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901415

Original file (MD0901415.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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.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...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800282

Original file (ND0800282.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801003

Original file (ND0801003.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Types of Documents Submitted/reviewedRelated 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) DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700887

Similar Decisions