Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900705

Original file (ND0900705.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-ADAN, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20090205

Characterization of Service Received:

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)        20061130 - 2007081 3     Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20070814     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20080922      Highest Rank/Rate: ADAA
Length of Service : Y ear ( s ) M onth ( s ) 09 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 60
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 3.0          Behavior: 3.0    OTA: 3.00

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP :
- 20080912 :       Art icle 92 ( Failure to obey order or regulation)
                  Awarded : Susp ended :

S CM :

SPCM:

C C :

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 /To Representat ion :          From /To Congress m ember :

Oth er Documentation :

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

Applicant’s Issues

1. Seeks reenlistment opportunity
2. Applicant states her discharge was inequitable because it was based on an isolated incident in 12 months.
3 . Applicant states her discharge due to misconduct was too harsh in comparison to the other complici t party .

Decision

Date : 20 0 9 0924 Location: Washington D.C . R epresentation :

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall (COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE) .

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 discharg e if such change is warranted. 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 refle cts nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for o f the Uniform Code of Mili tary Justice (UCMJ): Article 92 ( Failure to obey an order or regulation : disobeyed a direct order from her superiors not to have a relationship with another man until her marital separation was finalized by divorce ). Based on the offense(s) committed by the Applicant, command administratively processed for separation. The NDRB did not have the Applicant’s administrative separation package to determine whether or not the Applicant waived right s to consult with qualified counsel or submit a written statement for consideration by the separating authority. The Applicant was not entitled to an Administrative Board.

Issue 1: (Nondecisional) The Applicant wants her RE-code changed so she can reenlist. 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 BCNR can make changes to reenlistment codes. Additionally, the NDRB 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.

Issue 2: (D ecisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends her discharge was inequitable because it was based on an isolated incident in 12 months. 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. In the Applicant’s case, the Board could discern no impropriety or inequity and therefore considers the Applicant’s discharge proper and equitable. Relief denied.

Is sue 3 : (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends that her discharge was inequitable because another service member was punished less harshly for similar misconduct. The Board reviews the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge individually, on a case-by-case basis. If such a review reveals an impropriety or inequity, relief is in order. Regulations permit relief on equitable grounds if the Applicant’s discharge is inconsistent with standards of discipline of the N aval S ervice. Based upon available records, nothing indicates that the Applicant’s discharge was in any way inconsistent with the standards of discipline in the United States Navy. A preponderance of the evidence reviewed supports the conclusion that the Applicant committed a serious offense, that separation from the Naval Service was appropriate, and that a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge was warranted. As such, relief is denied.

Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s s ummary of s ervice, r ecord e ntries, and d ischarge p rocess, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reason for separation shall remain (COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE) . The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing until fifteen years from the date of discharge. The Applicant is directed to the Addendum, specifically the paragraphs titled Additio nal Reviews, Reenlistment/RE-code and Post-Service Conduct .

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 an order or regulation).

ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant

Complaint Procedures : If you believe 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 : 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. 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. There are vetera ns organizations such as the American Legion and the Association of Service Disable Veterans that are willing to provide guidance to former service members in their efforts to obtain a discharge upgrade. 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 U .S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) determines eligibility for post-service benefits, not the NDRB . 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 NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational opportunities. Regulations limit the NDRB’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 BCNR can make changes to reenlistment codes. Additionally, the NDRB 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 is processed subsequently for an administrative involuntary separation or is referred to a court martial for misconduct, the disability evaluation is suspended 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 d ischarge 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 BCNR can grant this type of narrative reason change.

Automatic Upgrades - There is no law or regulation that provides for an unfavorable discharge to be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct subsequent to leaving n aval service.

Post-Service Conduct : The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. 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 support a post-service conduct upgrade includes, but is not limited to: a verifiable continuous employment record; marriage and children’s birth certificate s (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 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 in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member’s overall character.

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 NDRB 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 | ND0900322

Original file (ND0900322.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Board determined the awarded discharge characterization of“General (Under Honorable Conditions) ” was appropriate and 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 Complaint Procedures : If you believe that the decision in your case is unclear, not responsive to the issues you raised, or does not otherwise...
NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0601173

Original file (ND0601173.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Despite a servicemember’s prior record of service, certain serious offenses, though isolated, warrant separation from the naval service in order to maintain proper order and discipline. Elements of Discharge: [INVOLUNTARY] Date Notified:NOT FOUND IN RECORDReason for Discharge Least Favorable Characterization Authorized: Date Applicant Responded to Notification: NOT FOUND IN RECORDRights Elected at Notification:Consult with Counsel Administrative Board SEPARATION CODE INDICATES BOARD...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901201

Original file (ND0901201.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 | 2008_Navy | ND0801964

Original file (ND0801964.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.Veteran’s Administration (VA) considers her service honorable.2.Record of service.3. The NDRB determined an upgrade would be inappropriate.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. ” Additional Reviews :...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801374

Original file (ND0801374.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant has requested an upgrade in her characterization to “Honorable”. However, due to the misconduct the Applicant’s record of service did not warrant the requested “Honorable” characterization.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...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801231

Original file (ND0801231.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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 service was marred by her violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 92 (Failure to obey an order) which constitutes the “commission of a serious offense”, the discharge basis in this case. As stated above, a violation of UCMJ Article 92...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800472

Original file (ND0800472.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

In the Applicant’s case the DD-214 indicates that she was processed for administrative separation based on MILPERSMAN 1910-142 (commission of a serious offense). The summary of service clearly documents the Applicant’s violations of UCMJ Articles 91 and 92 which created the basis for her administrative separation by reason of misconduct do to the commission of a serious offense. The Board determined that the documentation provided by the Applicant did not mitigate the misconduct which...
NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001196

Original file (ND1001196.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

However, the Board recommended by a vote of 3 to 0, that the Applicant receive a General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization of her service at discharge. The Separation Authority approved the recommendation for discharge, directing that the basis for separation be MISCONDUCT (Serious Offense) – having determined that the evidence of record supported the basis for discharge – and that the characterization of service, as recommended by the chain of command and the discharge board,...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900915

Original file (ND0900915.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)20060131 - 20060226Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20060227Age at Enlistment:Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20071002Highest Rank/Rate:ABHAALength of Service: Year(s)Month(s)06 Day(s)Education Level:AFQT: 38EvaluationMarks:Performance:2.0(1)Behavior:1.0(1)OTA: 1.33Awards and Decorations (per DD 214): NMCOSMPeriods...
NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700282

Original file (ND0700282.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USNR (DEP)19900209 - 19900411Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 19900412Years Contracted:Date of Discharge:19920221 Length of Service: 01Yrs 10Mths09 DysLost Time:Days UA: 1Education Level: Age at Enlistment:19AFQT: 41Highest Rank/Rate:FAEvaluation marks (# of occasions): Performance: 3.4 Behavior: 3.2 OTA: 3.6 (2)Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):SOUTHWEST ASIA SERVICE MEDAL, NATIONAL DEFENSE SERVICE MEDAL, SEA SERVICE...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900705

Similar Decisions