Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900693

Original file (ND0900693.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-SR, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20090202
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:        USNR (DEP)       19930514 - 19930823     Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment: 19930824      Age at Enlistment:
Period of Enlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 19960711       Highest Rank/Rate: SN
Length of Service: Year(s) Month(s) 18 D ay(s)
Education Level:         AFQT: 35
Evaluation Marks:        Performance: 3.1 ( 2 )     Behavior: 3.1 ( 2 )        OTA: 3.20

Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):     NDSM AFEM (2) BATTLE”E” USCGUC USCGSOR SWASM HSM JMUA

Periods of UA/CONF:

NJP:
- 19951122:      Article 86 (Failure to go to an appointed place of duty)
         Awarded: Suspended: Vacated 19951201

- 19951205:      Article 86 (Failure to go to an appointed place of duty)
         Awarded: Suspended:

- 19960513:      Article 112a (Wrongful use of a controlled substance - marijuana)
         Awarded: Suspended:

SCM: SPCM: CC: Retention Warning Counseling:

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 Representation:     From Congress member:

Other Documentation:

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

Applicant’s Issues

1. Youth and was an alcoholic.
2. Post-service conduct.

Decision

Date: 20090423 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 his discharge was inequitable because of his youth and he claims he was an alcoholic. He now claims he is no longer the man he was in his early twenties. 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 three NJPs for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 86 (UA, failure to go to an appointed place of duty), 2 specifications and Article 112a (Drug use, wrongful use of controlled substances – marijuana). The Applicant also had a pre-service drug waiver for using peyote and marijuana twice prior to enlisting in the Navy. The NDRB advises the Applicant certain serious offenses warrant separation from the service to maintain proper order and discipline. Violation of Article 112a is one such offense requiring mandatory separation regardless of time in service or grade. Violations of this policy result in, at a minimum, mandatory processing for an administrative separation which usually results in an unfavorable characterization of discharge or, at a maximum, a punitive discharge and possible 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. While the Applicant may believe his youth and immaturity was a factor in his misconduct, the record does not reflect he was not responsible for his actions or not accountable for his misconduct due to his youth or being an alcoholic. The NDRB determined the awarded discharge characterization was appropriate and an upgrade would be inappropriate based on this issue.

Issue 2: ( ) . The Applicant contends he doesn’t drink or do drugs any longer, has steady employment, and is studying for a college degree. 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 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; attendance or completion of higher education (official transcripts); and documentation of alcohol non-dependency and 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 with the DD Form 293, he provided two character references, but failed to provide any additional post-service documentation and evidence on his behalf. While the Board applauds the Applicant for his stated abstinence from drugs and alcohol, steady employment, and for continuing his education, the Board determined the evidence of post-service conduct was not sufficient enough to warrant an upgrade of his discharge characterization. To warrant an upgrade the Applicant’s post-service efforts needs 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. The Board determined the characterization of service received, Under Other Than Honorable Conditions, was an appropriate characterization considering the length of service and the UCMJ violation involved, and based on the limited post-service documentation provided an upgrade would be inappropriate. Should the Applicant obtain additional evidence or post-service documentation he may wish to apply for a personal appearance. There are veteran's organizations, such as the American Legion, willing to provide guidance to 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 . Navy Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 9/94, effective 22 July 1994 until
2 October 1996, Article 3630620, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED MEMBERS BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT DUE TO 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.

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, provided 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 granted 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.

Employment/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 | 2009_Navy | ND0900826

Original file (ND0900826.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)19960510 - 19960717Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 19960718Age at Enlistment:Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:19970509Highest Rank/Rate:SRLength of Service: Year(s)Month(s)22 Day(s)Education Level:AFQT: 79EvaluationMarks:Performance: NFIRBehavior:NFIROTA: NFIRAwards and Decorations (per DD 214):Periods of UA/CONF:...
USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801786

Original file (MD0801786.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Board determined the Applicant’s alcohol dependency did not mitigate his misconduct, but did determine an upgrade to “General (Under Honorable Conditions)” was appropriateand warranted. Thus, an upgrade to “General (Under Honorable Conditions)” would also be warranted due to his post-service efforts.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found ADDENDUM:...
NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1300822

Original file (ND1300822.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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 from the date of discharge. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900531

Original file (ND0900531.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...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801634

Original file (ND0801634.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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.At this time, the Applicant has not provided any documentation for the Board to consider an upgrade.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record...
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900048

Original file (MD0900048.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Board determined the characterization of service received, “Under Other Than Honorable Conditions”, was an appropriate characterization considering the length of service and the UCMJ violations involved, and based on the limited 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, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found ADDENDUM:...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900108

Original file (ND0900108.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. On page 4, Item 8, in the instructions for completion of DD Form 293, the Applicant is notified to submit evidence "which substantiate or relate directly to your issues in Item 6" (Issues: Why an upgrade or change is requested and justification for the request). ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801483

Original file (ND0801483.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant has provided documentation of employment, credit score, police record check, character references, and educational accomplishments in support of his request for an upgrade.While the Board applauds the Applicant’s post service efforts, the Board determined the evidence of post-service conduct did not to mitigate the misconduct which precipitated the discharge. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record Entries,...
NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700285

Original file (ND0700285.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

As of this time, the Applicant has not provided sufficient post-service documentation to consider mitigating the misconduct that resulted in the characterization of discharge.Issue 3 (): The Applicant claims he was never provided the opportunity for drug treatment prior to separating from service. Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USNR (DEP)20040704 - 20041026Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20041027Years Contracted:NOT FOUND IN RECORD; Extension: Date...
USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1500440

Original file (MD1500440.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. 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 remain BAD CONDUCT DISCHARGE and the narrative reason for separation shall remain . ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900693

Similar Decisions