Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801292

Original file (ND0801292.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-AM3, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20080528

Characterization of Service Received:

Narrative Reason for Discharge:

Authority for Discharge: MILPERSMAN

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

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive: US MC R (DEP)     20000606 - 20000629              Active: USN 20010823-20050820
         USNR (DEP)      20010724 - 20010822

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment: 20050821      Period of E nlistment : Years Extension          Date of Discharge: 20070426 HON
Length of Service : Y ear s M onth s 04 D a ys        Education Level:         Age at Enlistment:       AFQT: 66
Highest Rank /Rate :       AM2       Evaluation M arks: Performance: 4.6 ( 5 ) Behavior: 3.6 ( 5 )         OTA: 3.97
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): Rifle Pistol NMCAM (2)

NJP : 1
20070326 : Art icle 86 ( Illegal d rug u se )
Awarded : Susp ended :

Types of Documents Submitted/reviewed

Related to Military Service:
DD 214:         Service/ 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 Congress m ember :

Other Documentation (Describe) :

Pertinent Regulation/Law

A . The Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 11, effective 29 April 2005 until Present, Article 1910-146, Separation by Reason of Misconduct - Drug Abuse.

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 112a.

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

Applicant’s Issues

1. No legal counsel provided.
2. Not informed of legal options.
3 . Record of service.

Decision

Date: 20 08 1009 Location: Washington D.C . R epresentation :

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall MISCONDUCT .

Discussion

: ( ) . The Applicant contends he was not provided legal counsel prior to his administrative separation, and that his legal options were not explained to him. 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 Applicant’s record of service was marred by one NJP for a violation of the U niform C ode of M ilitary J ustice (UCMJ): Article 112a (Drug use) . Violations of Article 112a are considered serious offenses, punishable by punitive discharge and confinement if adjudicated and awarded as part of a sentence by a special or general court-martial. The command did not pursue a punitive discharge but opted instead for an administrative discharge. The record of evidence clearly shows the Applicant waived his rights to legal counsel on 10 April 2007 when he responded to the Administrative Separation Notification. T he Board determined this claim was without merit an d an upgrade would be inappropriate.

: ( ) . The Applicant contends his discharge should be upgraded since this was the only incident of misconduct in nearly si x years of otherwise honorable service. The Board commends the Applicant on his honest and faithful service prior to his misconduct. However, f or the edification of the Applicant, d espite a Sailor’s prior record of se rvice certain serious offenses, even though isolate d, warrant separation from the n aval service in order to maintain proper order and discipline. As discussed in the preceding paragraph, a violation of Article 112a i s considered a serious offense which requires mandatory separation from the service. A n “Under Other Than Honorable C onditions ” discharge is warranted when the basis for separation is commission or omission of an act that constitutes a significant departure from the conduct expected of a Sailor. The Board acknowledged the fact the Article 112a violation constitutes a significant departure from the conduct expected of a Sailor. Notwithstanding the sustained outstanding service record of the Applicant and the very strong letters of recommendation submitted with his DD293 Application, the Applicant’s commanding officer recommended he be discharged with an “Under Other Than Honorable” characterization. T he Board determined an upgrade would be inappropriate.

The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. However, there is no law or regulation, which provides a discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in the civilian life subsequent to leaving the service. Outstanding post-service conduct, 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, is considered during Board reviews . Documentation to help support a post service conduct upgrade includes, but is not limited to: a verifiable continuous employment record ; documentation of community or church service ; certification of non-involvement with civil authorities ; evidence of financial stability or letters of good standing from banks, credit card company’s, or other financial institutions; documentation of a drug free lifestyle; and character witness statements. The Applicant is advised that completion of these items alone does not guarantee the upgrade of an unfavorable discharge, as each discharge is reviewed by the Board on a case by case basis to determine if post service conduct mitigates the reason for the characterization of discharge. The Applicant provided no post service documentation for the Board to review.

T he Applicant is entitled to an additional review conducted by the NDRB , provided the application is received within fifteen years of discharge . The Applicant is directed to the Addendum , specifically the paragraph concerning Additional Reviews , regarding .

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

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 | 2010_Navy | ND1002180

Original file (ND1002180.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entriesand 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 a period of fifteen years from the date of discharge. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are...
NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200230

Original file (ND1200230.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant seeks to reenlist in the Armed Forces.2. Representation: By a vote of the Characterization shall .By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall .Discussion The NDRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge, is authorized to change the character of service and the reason for discharge if such change is warranted.In...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801264

Original file (ND0801264.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Board determined an upgrade or change 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 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1401104

Original file (ND1401104.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Representation: By a vote of the Characterization shall .By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall .Discussion The NDRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge, is authorized to change the character of service and the reason for discharge if such change is warranted.In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include...
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1102054

Original file (ND1102054.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: DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900354

Original file (ND0900354.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request: Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USNR (DEP): NONE Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20030128 Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: Years Extension Date of Discharge: 20040427 Highest Rank/Rate: ETSNLength of Service: Year Month(s) 00 Day(s) Education Level: AFQT: 74Evaluation Marks: Performance: 2.0 (1) Behavior: 2.0 (1) OTA: 2.00Awards and Decorations (per DD 214): Rifle...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801934

Original file (ND0801934.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Board determined the awarded discharge was appropriate and an upgrade would be inappropriate.The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. Should the Applicant feel at some later time his post service conduct is worthy of personally presenting to the NDRB there are organizations, such as the American Legion, willing to provide guidance and assistance in preparing such a presentation.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900188

Original file (ND0900188.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The separation authority directed separation with an “Under Other Than Honorable Conditions” discharge due to a pattern of misconduct. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record Entries, and Discharge Process, the Board found 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0902622

Original file (ND0902622.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. Since the NDRB is not an...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0902468

Original file (ND0902468.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

At this point,the Applicant stated she became suspect of her chain of command and began to perceive a hostile work environment where a predominantly male group was keeping her from being promoted.When questioned at the personal appearance hearing, the Applicant was unaware that advancement was based on a sliding cutoff scale depending on the specific rating as determined by the needs of the Navy in each rating. Completion of these items alone does not guarantee an upgrade from an...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801292

Similar Decisions