Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900021

Original file (ND0900021.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-YNSR, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20081001

Characterization of Service Received: OTHER THAN HONORABLE

Narrative Reason for Discharge: COMMISSION OF A 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)      19970422 - 19970805     Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment: 19970806     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 19990122      Highest Rank/Rate: YNSA
Length of Service : Y ear M onth s 17 D a ys
Education Level:        AFQT: 55
Evaluation M arks: Performance: 2.0 ( 1 ) Behavior: 1.0 ( 1 ) OTA: 2.00

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP : [Extracted from Evaluation Report & Counseling Record Comment on Performance].
- 1998121 8 :       Art icle 80 ( Attempt to defraud the government ) .
         Article 81 (Forgery of another’s signature )
         Awarded : NFRI Susp ended : NFIR

S CM : SPCM: C C :

Retention Warning Counseling :

- 19980526 :       For a pattern of misconduct as evidenced by uttering checks without sufficient funds in a bank for payment of those checks to the Navy Exchange on or about 19980416, 19980418 and 19980515 (a total of seven checks), in violation of UCMJ Article 123a .

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. Reenlistment opportunities , change RE code.
2. Record of service

Decision

Date : 20 0 9 0129 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 .

administrative note

It was noted the Applicant’s service records were incomplete. In such cases the NDRB conducts its review under the presumption the Navy acted in the proper manner with the information they had available. However, the NDRB noted the Applicant was charged with a violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 81 (Forgery of another’s signature). In accordance with the UCMJ, Article 81 is identified as Conspiracy and Article 123 is Forgery. Without a complete discharge package or additional information concerning this incident it is unclear which Article is actually correct. Notwithstanding this possible administrative error, the NDRB’s review would have reached the same conclusion regardless of a violation of Article 81 or Article 123; both violations are serious enough to support and warrant the awarded discharge characterization.

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. The Applicant is directed to the Addendum , specifically the paragraph concerning s , regarding .

: ( ) . The Applicant did not identify any specific Issues upon which the Board ca n consider to recharacterize her discharge. However, the Board did complete a thorough review of th e circumstances which led to her discharge and the discharge process to ensure her discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety. 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 is marred by a retention wa rning for uttering checks without sufficient funds (total of 7 checks) and a NJP for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 80 (Attempt to defrau d the government) and Article 81 (Forgery). These violations are considered serious offenses, punishable by punitive discharge or confinement if adjudicated by a special or general court-martial. The command did not pursue a punitive discharge, but opted instead for administrative discharge. The Board determined the awarded discharge characterization was appropriate and 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 an unfavorable 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; marriage and children’s birth certificate (if applicable); character witness statements; 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 companies, or other financial institutions; attending or completion of higher education (official transcripts) and documentation of a drug free lifestyle. 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.

Besides the Applicants statement on the DD Form 293, s he failed to provide any additional documentation or evidence on her behalf. To warrant an upgrade the Applicant’s post service efforts need to be more encompassing. The Applicant could have produced additional evidence as stated in the above paragraph with the full understanding completion of these items alone does not guarantee an upgrade. Should the Applicant feel h er post service conduct becomes substantial enough to warrant a personal appearance, there are veteran’s organizations, such as the American Legion, willing to provide guidance to assist former service members in their efforts to obtain a discharge upgrade.

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 18, effective 12 December 1997 until
29 March 2000, 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 s of the UCMJ, Article 80 (Attempt to defraud the government) and Article 81 (Conspiracy) or Article 123 (Forgery).

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 | 2011_Navy | ND1100834

Original file (ND1100834.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. DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL...
USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1000110

Original file (MD1000110.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. 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. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal...
NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1002296

Original file (ND1002296.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. There is no requirement or law that grants recharacterization solely on the issue of obtaining veterans benefits and this issue does not serve to...
USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1101218

Original file (MD1101218.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities. ” 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 | 2011_Navy | ND1102168

Original file (ND1102168.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant seeks an upgrade due to passage of time.2. The NDRB acknowledges the Applicant’s desire to provide a better life for himself and his family, however, this issue does not serve to provide a foundation upon which the Board can grant relief. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance...
NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200689

Original file (ND1200689.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Therefore no two cases, no matter how similar, are guaranteed to receive the same punishment.The NDRB reviews the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge individually, on a case-by-case basis. Full relief was not granted because of the serious nature of the Applicant’s documented misconduct.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...
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 | 2013_Navy | ND1301876

Original file (ND1301876.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends his misconduct was an isolated incident.2. ” 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000567

Original file (ND1000567.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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. 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0902603

Original file (ND0902603.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)19980827 - 19990628Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 19990629Age at Enlistment:Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20000313Highest Rank/Rate:MM3Length of Service: Year(s)Month(s)15 Day(s)Education Level:AFQT: 76EvaluationMarks:Performance:3.0(1)Behavior:1/0(1)OTA: 2.33Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):NONEPeriods...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900021

Similar Decisions