Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900305

Original file (ND0900305.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-SKSR, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20081125

Characterization of Service Received:

Narrative Reason for Discharge:
Authority for Discharge: MILPERSMAN

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

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive: US N R (DEP)      20001222 - 20011212     Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment: 20011213     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20030724      Highest Rank/Rate: SKSA
Length of Service : Y ear M onth ( s ) 18 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 65
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 1.0 ( 1 )      Behavior: 1.0 ( 1 )        OTA: 1.17

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214) :

Periods of UA : 20020523-20020524 (1 day) ; 20021009-20021010 (1 day) ; 20021119-20021120 (2 day)
CONF: 20030521 – 20030619 (29 days)

NJP :
- 20030213 : Art icle 121 (Larceny , 2 specifications)
Awarded : Susp ended :

- 20030317 : Article 86 (U A, failure to go )
Awarded: Susp ended :

S CM :

- 20030520 : Art icle 86 (U A)
Article 134 (Unauthorized pass offenses)
Sentence :

SPCM: C C :

Retention Warning Counseling :
- 20030213 : For NJP – Article 121 (Larceny)

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

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

“ 20020523-20020524 (1 day); 20021009-20021010 (1 day); 20021119-20021120 (2 day); 20030521 – 20030619 (29 days) ”

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

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 :

Pertinent Regulation/Law

A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), re-issued October 2002, effective 22 August 2002 until 25 January 2004, Article 1910-140, SEPARATION BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT - PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT.

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 86 (U A), Article 121 (Larceny) and Article 134 (Unauthorized pass offense) .

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

Applicant’s Issues

1. Youth and i mmaturity .
Decision

Date : 20 0 9 0226 Location: Washington D.C R epresentation :

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

Discussion

: ( ) . The App licant contends his problems in the Navy can be attributed to mistake s he made when he was young and immature . While he may feel his immaturity was the underlying cause of his misconduct, the record of evidence does not demonstrate the Applicant was not responsible for his misconduct or should not be held accountable for his actions due to youth or immaturity . 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 a retention warning, two NJP s and a S CM for violation s of the Uniform Cod e of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 86 (U A) , Article 121 (Larceny) and Article 134 (Unauthorized pass offense). These violations are considered serious offenses, punishable by punitive discharge and confinement if adjudicated by a special or general court-martial. The command did not pursue a punitive discharge but opted instead for an administrative discharge. The Board determined the awarded discharge characterization was appropriate and an upgrade would be inappropriate based on youth or immaturity .

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 Applicant ’ s statement on the DD Form 293 he has sleeping problems , he failed to provide any additional documentation or evidence on his 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 f eel at some later time his post- service conduct is worthy of personally pre senting to the NDRB there are organizations, such as the American Legion, Disabled American Veterans , etc. , willing to provide guidance and assistance in preparing such a presentation.

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 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

USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1101011

Original file (MD1101011.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.Secretary of the Navy...
NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700049

Original file (ND0700049.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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 both proper and equitable. Award: Forfeiture of $618.00 for 2 month(s), restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to E-2.No indication of appeal in the record.20020808: NJP for violation(s) of UCMJ: Article 92: Dereliction in the...
NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500497

Original file (ND0500497.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

After a review of the Former Service Members (FSM) DD Form 293 Application for the Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the Armed Forces of the United States and all of evidence assembled for review, we continue to note the contention of the appellant in his request for a discharge upgrade of his current General Under Honorable Conditions discharge to Honorable, with a change of the narrative reason to Medical Retirement. J. H_, PHD, Staff Psychologist040209: Medical evaluation by Branch...
NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700434

Original file (ND0700434.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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 Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214 The NDRB did note administrative error(s) on the original DD Form 214: “ 99 JUN 08 ” “UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS ” “ PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT ” The NDRB will recommend to the Commander, Navy Personnel Command, that the DD...
NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00746

Original file (ND04-00746.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). No indication of appeal in the record.030129: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.030129: Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all...
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101403

Original file (ND1101403.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The NDRB determined that the characterization of the Applicant’s discharge was equitable and that relief based on this issue is not 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 the narrative reason for separation shall remain .The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801879

Original file (ND0801879.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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, Disabled American Veterans, etc.,willing to provide guidance and assistance in preparing such a presentation.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...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801476

Original file (ND0801476.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The events that transpired during the Applicant’s career in the Navy were a direct result of the Applicant’s self-denial he had an alcohol problem and the Navy only diagnosing him as an alcohol abuser and not as being alcohol dependent. The characterization of service received, “General (Under Honorable Conditions)”, was determined to be an appropriate characterization considering the length of service and the UCMJ violations involved, and based on the limited post service documentation...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900701

Original file (ND0900701.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: Substance Abuse: Criminal Records: Family/Personal Status: Community Service: References: Additional Statements: From Applicant: From Representation:From Congress member: Other Documentation: DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL...
USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1000260

Original file (MD1000260.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. After a complete review of the entire record, including the evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board determined the discharge was appropriate and the evidence of post-service conduct was found not to mitigate the conduct that precipitated the discharge. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900305

Similar Decisions