Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800988

Original file (ND0800988.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-MM2, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20080401

Characterization of Service Received:

Narrative Reason for Discharge: (SERIOUS OFFENSE)

Authority for Discharge: MILPERSMAN

Applicant’s Request:     Characterization change to:
                           Narrative Reason change to: SOMETHING OTHER THAN SERIOUS MISCONDUCT

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive: US N R (DEP)      19980122 - 19980526              Active: 19980527 – 20050104 HON

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment: 20050105      Period of E nlistment : Years Extension          Date of Discharge: 20070228
Length of Service : Yrs Mths 23 D ys      Education Level:         Age at Enlistment:       AFQT: 89
Highest Rank /Rate : MM1    Evaluation marks: Performance: 4.0 ( 3 )     Behavior: 3.0 ( 3 )          OTA: 3.62
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): NDSM NMCAM NGCM(2) AFEM GWOTEM GWOTSM NAVY”E” SSDR(2) FLOC GWA(4) ESWS

NJPs :
20070125 : Art icle 92 ( Failure to obey a lawful ly written order ) , 3 specifications:
- Spec 1: (Violate d a lawful general order by wrongfully forming a private and unofficial social
relationship with S . T . , a Delayed Entry Program r ecruit ).
- Spec 2: (Violate d a lawful general order by wrongfully forming a private and unofficial social
r elationship with K . B . , a Navy prospect) .
- Spec 3: (Violate d a lawful general order by allowing Delayed Entry Program personnel to unofficially
ride in a government vehicle).
Awarded - . Susp - .

S CMs :

SPCMs:

C C :

Retention Warnings: .

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

The NDRB did note administrative error(s) on the original DD Form 214:

         “ CONTINUO U S HONORABLE ACTIVE SERVICE 19980527-20050104 ”

The NDRB will recommend to the Commander, Navy Personnel Command, that the DD 214 be corrected as appropriate.

Types of Documents Submitted/reviewed

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. Isolated incident.

Decision

Date: 20 08 0814 Location: Washington D.C R epresentation :

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall MISCONDUCT (SERIOUS OFFENSE) .

Discussion

: ( ) . The Applicant request ed an upgrade based on the fact this misconduct was an isolated incident in his 8 plus years of otherwise good service. For the edification of the Applicant, d espite a service members prior record of se rvice certain serious offenses, even though isolate d, warrant separation from the n aval service in order to maintai n proper order and discipline. I n 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 Applicant ’ s record of service was marred by one nonjudicial punishment for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Article 92 ( Failure to obey a lawful order) , 3 specifications. Specifically, the Applicant , who was at the time a recruiter , abused his position and had improper relations with female recruit , a prospective female recruit and allowed delayed entry personnel to unofficially ride in a Government vehicle. These violations are considered serious in nature and could have resulted in a punitive discharge and confinement if adjudged by a special or general court-martial. However, the command did not pursue a punitive discharge and opted instead for an administrative discharge.

An honorable characterization of service is warranted when the quality of a member ’ s service generally meets the standard of acceptable conduct and performance for naval personnel, or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization of service would be clearly inappropriate. A general (under honorable conditions) discharge is warranted when the quality of the member ’ s service has been honest and faithful but significant negative aspects of the member ’ s conduct or performance of duty outweighed the positive aspects of the member ’ s service record . The Applicant ’ s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, reflects his willful failure to meet the requirements of his contract with the U.S. Navy and falls far short of that required for an upgrade of his characterization of service to an Honorable . The Board determined 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. 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 92 .

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 or is referred to a court martial 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 other medical related reasons. 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 special 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. The NDRB does not have the jurisdictional authority to review a discharge or dismissal resulting from a general court-martial.

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 | 2008_Navy | ND0800851

Original file (ND0800851.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) Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214 The NDRB did note...
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901205

Original file (MD0901205.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USMCR (DEP)19970221 - 19971006Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 19971007Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: Years MonthsDate of Discharge:20010613Highest Rank: Length of Service: Year(s)Month(s)25 Day(s)Education Level: AFQT:43MOS: 0811Proficiency/Conduct Marks (# of occasions):/Fitness Reports: Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):Rifle...
USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0601219

Original file (MD0601219.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant was afforded appropriate treatment for his alcohol abuse problem, and his discharge for misconduct was suspended for one year in order to provide him an opportunity to rehabilitate his performance and conduct. 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600404

Original file (ND0600404.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. No indication of appeal in the record.040126: Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (Applicant’s violation of Article 111 of the UCMJ), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.040525: Applicant to unauthorized absence at 0700 on 040525.040527: Applicant from unauthorized...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900318

Original file (ND0900318.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant contends the characterization of service he received upon discharge should be based on his first enlistment and thus he requests a “General (Under Honorable Conditions).” For his first enlistment, the Applicants service was characterized as “Honorable.” The Applicant reenlisted on 5 December 2003 for 4 more years, which was 7 months before his first enlistment would have expired.In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of Government affairs unless...
NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700350

Original file (ND0700350.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

When the service of a member of the U.S. Navy has been honest and faithful, it is appropriate to characterize that service as honorable (or general under honorable conditions). The Board determined that the documentation provided by the Applicant did not mitigate the misconduct which resulted in the Applicant’s discharge and characterization of his service. After a thorough review of the available evidence to include the Applicant’s summary of service, medical and service record entries,...
NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1002148

Original file (ND1002148.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The administrative board voted 3-0 that the evidence supported commission of a serious offense and 3-0 to separate with an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions characterization of service. 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 remainMISCONDUCT. ”...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800660

Original file (ND0800660.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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) DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW...
NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700253

Original file (ND0700253.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Date Applicant Responded to Notification:19910515 Rights Elected at Notification: Consult with Counsel Obtain Copies of Documents Submit Statement(s) (date) Administrative Board GCMCA review Commanding Officer Recommendation (date): (19910603) Separation Authority (date): BUPERS WASHINGTON DC (19910617)Reason for discharge directed: - Characterization directed: Date Applicant Discharged: 19920416 Types of Documents Submitted by Applicant and Considered By BoardRelated to Military Service:...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901335

Original file (ND0901335.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1.I was told by my CO and XO that I would receive a medical discharge. The NDRB determined the awarded character of service was warranted and the narrative reason for discharge was appropriate.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, medical and service record entries, and discharge process, the Board found...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800988

Similar Decisions