Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900888

Original file (ND0900888.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-ABFAR, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20090304

Characterization of Service Received:

Narrative Reason for Discharge:

Authority for Discharge: MILPERSMAN

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

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive:         US N R (DEP)        20010531 - 20020210     Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment: 20020211     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20050330      Highest Rank/Rate: ABFAN
Length of Service : Y ear ( s ) M onth ( s ) 00 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 42
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: NFIR         Behavior: NFIR OTA: NFIR

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

Periods of UA /C ONF : 0730, 20041008-1330, 20041009 (1 day, 6 hours, min utes); 0001, 20050116-0255, 2005 0314 ( 57 days, 2 hours, 54 minutes) / CONF:

NJP :

- 20021216 :       Art icle 92 ( Failure to obey a written general regulation)
         Awarded : Susp ended : 1 month

- 20040325 :       Article 90 (Willfully disobeying superior commissioned officer) , 2 specifications
         Awarded: Suspended:

- 20041027 :      Article 86 (UA), 2 specifications
         Spec 1: 20040802-20040803
         Spec 2: Go from appointed place of duty
         Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation) , 3 specifications
         Awarded: Suspended:

- 20041203 :      Article 86 (UA 1830-2030, 20041105 , 2 hours)
         Article 90 (Willful disobedience of superior commissioned officer), 2 specifications
         Spec 1: Not receive visitors while in a restricted status
         Spec 2: To not use cell phones during an emissions control drill
         Article 91 (Insubordinate conduct toward warrant, noncommissioned or petty officer)
         Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation)
         Awarded: Suspended:

- 20041216 :      Article 86 (UA - restricted muster), 3 specifications
         Awarded: Suspended:

- 20050314 :      Article 86 (UA , 57 days , surrendered )
         Awarded: Suspended:

S CM :

SPCM:

C C :

Retention Warning Counseling :

- 20040325 :       For willfully disobeying superior commissioned officer.

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 86 (UA for more than 30 days), Arti cle 90 ( Willfully disobeying superior commissioned officer ) , Article 91 ( Insubordinate conduct toward warrant, noncommissioned or petty officer ) , and Article 92 ( Failure to obey order or regulation ) .

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

Applicant’s Issues

1. Base d on an isolated incident in 37 months of service.

Decision

Date : 20 0 9 0702 Location: Washington D.C . R epresentation :

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

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 g overnment al affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant. The Applicant’s record of service included one NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13) warning and six nonjudicial punishments (NJPs) for violation s of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ ): Article 86 (Unauthorized absence, 7 specifications , 57 days , 1 day, others for missing restriction muster and extra duty muster ), Article 90 (Willfully disobeying superior commissioned officer, 4 specifications), Article 91 (Insubordinate conduct toward warrant, non-commissioned or petty officer), and Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation, 5 specifications). Based on the offenses committed by the Applicant, command administratively processed for separation. When notified for Administrative Separation Processing, the Applicant waived rights to consult with qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request an Administrative Board.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his misconduct was base d on one isolated incident in 37 months of service. He also stated his spouse was very ill and he tried to obtain a hardship discharge.
The evidence of record clearly shows the Applicant had six NJPs, not one isolated incident. Furthermore, there is no evidence in the record, nor did the Applicant provide any, of his spouse’s illness or that he tried to request a hardship discharge. The Applicant’s contention is without merit.

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 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. The Applicant is directed to the Addendum, specifically the paragraphs titled Additional Reviews, Automatic Upgrades, and Post-Service Conduct .

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 veterans 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 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 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 naval 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 certificates (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 at 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 | 2004_Navy | ND04-01041

Original file (ND04-01041.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ND04-01041 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20040607. 900710: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86 (21 specifications): UA from pre-trial restriction muster. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged on 19930222 with a bad conduct discharge which was the sentence adjudged by a properly convened special court-martial.
USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1400203

Original file (MD1400203.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 | 2005_Navy | ND0501136

Original file (ND0501136.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION No indication of appeal in the record.930615: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a commission of a serious offense and commission of a pattern of misconduct.930621: Applicant advised of rights and having consulted with counsel, elected to appear before an administrative discharge board, to be represented at administrative discharge board, to submit...
NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700009

Original file (ND0700009.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant’s service was marred by a summary court martial, three nonjudicial punishments and a retention warning for violations of UCMJ Articles 86 (unauthorized absence, 6 specifications), 87 (missing movement), 90 (willfully disobeying a superior commissioned officer), 91 (insubordinate conduct, 2 specifications), and 92 (failure to obey, 2 specifications). Elements of Discharge: [INVOLUNTARY] Date Notified: NOT FOUND IN RECORD Reason for DischargeNOT FOUND IN RECORDLeast Favorable...
NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-01105

Original file (ND02-01105.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

In the acknowledgement letter to the Applicant, he was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION 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- unauthorized absence.
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801511

Original file (ND0801511.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant should be aware completion of these items alone does not guarantee an upgrade from 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.Besides the personal statement provided on the DD Form-293, the Applicant only provided a letter from his Congressmen dated in November 2001 which is inresponse to the Applicant asking the Senator for help in...
USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1301497

Original file (MD1301497.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

After a thorough review of the Applicant’s records, the NDRB determined clemency was not warranted. ” 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. 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...
USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600749

Original file (MD0600749.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY ex-PVT, USMCDocket No. The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The factual basis for this recommendation was your three nonjudicial punishments, one evidencing your willful disobedience of a superior commissioned officer and your uttering worthless checks by dishonorably failing to maintain...
NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700214

Original file (ND0700214.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant’s service was marred by four nonjudicial punishments and two retention warning for violations of UCMJ Articles 86 (unauthorized absence, 6 specifications), 87 (missing movement), 90 (willfully disobeying a superior commissioned officer), 91 (insubordinate conduct, 2 specifications), 92 (failure to obey, 3 specifications), 107 (false official statements), 111 (drunk operation of a motor vehicle), 112 (drunk on watch), and 134 (disorderly conduct and communicating a threat). ...
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900719

Original file (MD0900719.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900888

Similar Decisions