Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900381

Original file (ND0900381.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-CNNA, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20081203

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)      20001027 - 20010103     Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment: 20010104     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20040831      Highest Rank/Rate: CSSN
Length of Service : Y ear ( s ) M onth ( s ) 27 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 31
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 3.0 ( 5 )      Behavior: 2.8 ( 5 )        OTA: 3.10

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

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP :
- 20020808 :       Art icle 86 ( Absence without leave )
         Article 87 (Missing Movement)
         Awarded : Susp ended : for 6 months

- 20030116 :       Article 80 ( Attempts )
         Awarded : Defrocked from E-4 Susp ended : for 6 months

- 200 4 08 11 :       Article 91 ( Insubordinate conduct toward Warrant Officer, Noncommissioned Officer, or Petty Officer )
         Article 92 ( Failure to obey or regulation )
         Article 134 (Disorderly conduct, drunkenness)
         Article 134 (Impersonating a Commissioned Warrant, Noncommissioned or Petty Officer, or an Agent or Official)
         Awarded : Susp ended: for 6 months

S CM : SPCM: C C :

Retention Warning Counseling :

- 20020721:      For unauthorized absence over liberty as of 0600, 2002 July 21. Surrendered on board USS LA SALLE (AGF-3) at 1130, 2002 July 2002. Unauthorized absence for about 5 hours , 30 minutes.

-20020721:       For missing sailing of this vessel from Gaeta, Italy, on 21 July 2002 en route Mediterranean Ocean. SN Freddy J Rodriguez, USN, was informed by his leading petty officer of the time and date of scheduled movement of the ship prior to the ship’s getting underway and of the ship’s destination.

Retention Warning Counseling (cont) :

- 20040811 :       For violating Article 91 ( Insubordinate conduct toward Warrant Officer, Noncommissioned Officer, or Petty Officer ) , Article 92 (Failure to obey or regulation), Article 134 (Disorderly conduct, drunkenness),
         Article 134 (Impersonating a Commissioned Warrant, Noncommissioned or Petty Officer, or an Agent or Official) .

- 20040819:      For refusing screening by the Corpus Christi Substance Abuse Rehabilitation Program (SARP) for alcohol abuse today Aug 19 2004. Member refused treatment for alcohol abuse while stationed onboard HM-15, NAS Corpus Christi .

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 April 2005, 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 80 ; Article 86 ; Article 87 ; Article 91 ; Article 92 and Article 134.

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

Applicant’s Issues

1. GI Bill to go to college.
2. Was not treated fair ly .

Decision

Date : 20 0 9 0312 Location: Washington D.C . R epresentation :

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

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 , regarding .

: ( ) . The Applicant contends he was treated un fairly by the command. 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 ma rred by four retention warnings and three NJPs for violation s of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 80 (Attempts) ; Article 86 ( UA, a bsence without leave ) ; Article 87 (Missing Movement) ; Article 91 (Insubordinate conduct toward Warrant Officer, Noncommissi oned Officer, or Petty Officer) ; Article 92 (Failure to obey or regulation) ; Article 134 (D isorderly conduct, drunkenness) and Article 134 (Impersonating a Commissioned Warrant, Noncommissioned or Petty Officer, or an Agent or Official) . Violations of these Articles are considered serious offenses which could have resulted in a punitive discharge and confinement if adjudicated and awarded as part of a sentence by a special or general court martial. In addition, t he Applicant refused all available treatment provided by the Corpus Christi Substance Abuse Rehabilitation Program (SARP) , and signed the NAVPERD 1070/618 acknowledgin g that by refusing treatment he would be separated from the Navy. Refusing treatment is justification for administrative separation. The command did not pursue a punitive discharge for the numerous UCMJ violations but instead opted for an administrative discharge. During the administrative separation process, members are given the opportunity to consult with legal counsel and make a statement. If the Applicant felt he was being treated unfairly, it was his obligation to contest those charges at the time they were made. The Applicant submitted no evidence to support his contention; therefore the NDRB must rely upon the presumption of regularity in the conduct of government affairs.

For the edification of the Applicant, w hen the quality of a member’s service has met the standards of accepted conduct and performance of duty for military personnel, it is appropriate to characterize that service under “Honorable” conditions. A “General (Under Honorable Conditions)” is appropriate if the member’s service has been honest and faithful but significant negative aspects of the member’s conduct or performance outweighs positive aspects of the member’s military record. The Board determined the Applicant’s NJP s were sufficient misconduct to warrant the awarded “General (Under Honorable Conditions)” discharge 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; 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 rev iewed 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 failed to provide any additional post-service documentation and evidence on his behalf. To warrant an upgrade the Applican t’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 is 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

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 | 2005_Navy | ND0501074

Original file (ND0501074.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). Plan: (1) Patient to contact for safety, (2) Master of Arms and her Commander in charge will check patient periodically throughout evening and will inform medical of any changes/concerns, (3) Return to counseling on October 5, 2001 for confinement physical evaluation. The names, and votes of the members of the Board are recorded on the...
NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0601008

Original file (ND0601008.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Elements of Discharge: [INVOLUNTARY] Date Notified:NOT FOUND IN RECORDReason for Discharge - Least Favorable Characterization Authorized: NOT FOUND IN RECORDDate Applicant Responded to Notification: NOT FOUND IN RECORDRights Elected at Notification:Consult with Counsel Obtain Copies of DocumentsSubmit Statement(s) (date)Administrative Board GCMCA Review Commanding Officer Recommendation (date): Separation Authority (date):COMMANDER, NAVY REGION SOUTH (20040625)Reason for discharge directed:...
NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1300577

Original file (ND1300577.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/To Congress member: Pertinent Regulation/Law A. DEPARTMENT OF THE...
NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001872

Original file (ND1001872.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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.The NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing educational 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301530

Original file (ND1301530.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge to help an Applicant’s life or to help him support his family. 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 for a period of fifteen years...
NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301760

Original file (ND1301760.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. A request for a waiver can be submitted during the processing of a formal application for reenlistment through a recruiter.
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101605

Original file (ND1101605.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant seeks an upgrade in order to receive health benefits. ” 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. A request for a waiver can be submitted during the processing of a formal...
NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500131

Original file (ND0500131.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Letter from Applicant dtd September 27, 2004 (2 pgs) Applicant’s DD Form 214 (2) Court Memorandum Letter of Commendation Awards Listing (2 pgs) Personnel Qualification Standards Listing Navy and Marine Corps Achievement Medal Citation Evaluation Report & Counseling Record (Partial) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of...
NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600584

Original file (ND0600584.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

*Third set of Performance and Behavior marks extracted from supporting documents submitted by the Applicant (page 1 only) Character, Narrative Reason, and Authority of Discharge (at time of issuance):UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT, authority: MILPERSMAN, Article 1910-140 (formerly 3630600). Pt stated that he has had suicidal thoughts since a kid but denied any plans or attempts. When the service of a member of the U.S. Navy has been honest and faithful, it is...
NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00517

Original file (ND03-00517.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable and the reason for the discharge be changed to medical. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant’s ECG report undtdApplicant’s Medical Consultation, Branch Medical Clinic, Great Lakes, dtd May 1, 2000Applicant’s Radiologic Exam Report dtd Aug 23, 2001 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900381

Similar Decisions