Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801813

Original file (ND0801813.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-GSM3, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20080903

Characterization of Service Received:

Narrative Reason for Discharge: - SERIOUS OFFENSE

Authority for Discharge: MILPERSMAN

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

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive: US N R (DEP) 19970731 - 19980610        Active:          19980611 - 20020221

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment: 20020222     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20060426      Highest Rank/Rate: GSM3
Length of Service : Y ear s M onth s 05 D a ys
Education Level:        AFQT: 51
Evaluation M arks: Performance: 4.4 ( 5 ) Behavior: 3.6 ( 5 ) OTA: 3.86

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      (2) (3) (2) (2) ESWS

Periods of UA /C ONF : S CM : S PCM: CC : Retention Warning Counseling :

NJP:
- 20060131 : Article 92 (Failure to obey lawful order or regulation) , extracted from Co mmanding Officer’s letter dated
20060225
         Awarded : No further information found in service record

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 :
Oth er Documentation :

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

Applicant’s Issues

1. Isolated incident of misconduct.
2. Improper handing of discharge.

Decision

Date: 20 08 1211 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 contends he is entitled to a discharge upgrade due to his isolated incident of misconduct. 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 violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 92 (Disobeying a lawful order or regulation ) in that he had an inappropriate relationship with a seventeen year- old applicant to the Navy while serving as a Navy Recruiter. Violation of Article 92 is considered a serious offense, punishable by punitive discharge and confinement if adjudicated and awarded by a special or general court-martial. The command did not pursue a punitive discharge but instead opted for an administrative discharge with a “General (Under Honorable Conditions)” characterization of service, when the less favorable “Under Other Than Honorable” characterization could have been used. Despite 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. The NDRB determined the awarded discharge characterization was appropriate and an upgrade founded upon the Applicant’s record of service and his misconduct being an isolated event would be inappropriate.

: ( ) . The Applicant contends he is entitled to a discharge upgrade because of administrative errors made in completing his discharge. Specifically, he contends there was a twenty-two month delay between his leaving active duty and his actual processing for discharge. The record of evidence does indicate unusual administrative problems involved in the final processing of the Applicant’s discharge. However, the NDRB determined this administrative error in no way mitigates his misconduct and is not a sufficient basis to warrant an upgrade to his discharge. The awarded discharge characterization was appropriate and an upgrade is not warranted due to administrative errors made during the Applicant’s out-processing.

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 (Failure to obey lawful order or regulation).

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 or for any basis wherein an Other Than Honorable Discharge is authorized, 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 | ND0801729

Original file (ND0801729.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Board determined the characterization of service received, “Under Other Than Honorable Conditions”, was an appropriate characterization considering the time served and the UCMJ violations involved, and based on the lack of 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, and Discharge Process, the Board found ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant...
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101979

Original file (ND1101979.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant seeks an upgrade for service benefits.2. Based on the offenses committed by the Applicant, command administratively processed for separation. ” 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 | 2009_Navy | ND0902175

Original file (ND0902175.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. 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 accomplishments help demonstrate previous in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member’s overall character.Summary: After a thorough...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800549

Original file (ND0800549.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) The NDRB did note administrative error(s) on the original DD Form...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900253

Original file (ND0900253.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

” Separation in lieu of court-martial is based on the voluntary request of the member, considered comparable to a plea bargain and normally characterized as “Under Other Than Honorable Conditions”.The characterization of service is based on the entire enlistment period, not portions of it.Since the Board could not fully evaluate the Applicant’s conduct during his second enlistment,the Board relies on a presumption of regularity in this case. After a thorough review of the available...
NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1500569

Original file (ND1500569.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Characterization of Service Received: (per DD 214) UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL) As such, this issue does not serve to provide a foundation upon which the NDRB can grant relief.Issue 2: (Decisional) (Propriety) The Applicant submitted a copy of his Good Conduct Award for documentation of his conduct so that the correction could be made to the discharge characterization. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal...
NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1300187

Original file (ND1300187.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 | 2014_Navy | ND1401452

Original file (ND1401452.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall remain UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL) and the narrative reason for separation shall remain MISCONDUCT (SERIOUS OFFENSE). ” 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700942

Original file (ND0700942.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Date: 20080103Location:Washington D.C Representation: Discussion Issues 1 -2: 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’s service was marred by one discharge warning and two non-judicial punishments for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) Article 92 (Failure to obey a direct order), Article 107 (False Official Statement), Article...
NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1500041

Original file (ND1500041.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant could have provided documentation as detailed in the Post-Service Conduct paragraph in the Addendum , however, completion of these items alone does not guarantee an upgrade from an unfavorable discharge as each discharge is reviewed by the Board on a case by case basis to determine if post-service conduct establishes that the in-service misconduct was an aberration. Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service,...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801813

Similar Decisions