Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901020

Original file (ND0901020.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-ABEAN, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20090317

Characterization of Service Received:

Narrative Reason for Discharge: (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)        20031117 - 20041024     Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment: 20041025     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20080820      Highest Rank/Rate: ABEAN
Length of Service : Y ear ( s ) M onth ( s ) 27 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 42
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 4.0 ( 1 )      Behavior: 4.0 ( 1 )        OTA: 3.83

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):

Periods of UA : 20080201 – 20080710 (161 days)

NJP :
- 20061003 :       Art icle 92 ( Drinking Underage ), 2 specifications
         Article 128(Assault)
                  Awarded : Susp ended :

S CM : SPCM: C C :

Retention Warning Counseling :
- 20061016 :       For disobeyed a lawful order of drinking alcoholic beverage below the age of and assault consummated by a battery.

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 : Death Certificate, Letter from funeral home, letter from education specialist.

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

Applicant’s Issues

1. Applicant s eeks reenlistment opportunities .
2. Applicant s eeks employment opportunities .
3 . Applicant claims his a bility to serve was impaired by personal problems .
4 . Applicant believes his discharge c haracterization does not accurately reflect his service.

Decision

Date : 20 0 9 0910 Location: Washington D.C . R epresentation :

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall MISCONDUCT (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 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 NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13) warnings, non - judicial punishment for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 92 ( Failure to obey an order or regulation, to wit: underage drinking) and Article 128 (Assault). In addition, the Applicant went into an unauthorized absence (Article 86) and missed ship movement (Article 87) from San Diego, California to Everett, Washington on 1 February 2008 and stayed absen t until he surrendered to Navy personnel in Fort Worth, Texas on 10 July, 2008; ending his 161 day unauthorized absence. Based on the offense(s) committed by the Applicant, command administratively processed for separation. When notified for a dministrative s eparation p rocessing, the Applicant waived rights to consult with qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request an a dministrative b oard.

: (Nondecisional) [ Reenlistment ] 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 B oard for Correction of Naval Records (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 : (Nondecisional) [Employment ] 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.

Issue 3: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his ability to serve was impaired by personal problems (girlfriend ’ s high-risk pregnancy). In the Board ’ s opinion, based on the limited documentation the Applicant provided , the Applicant’s explanation did not mesh with the timeline of events he provided (i.e., he went UA due to girlfriend’s high risk pregnancy on 1 February 2008; however, he noted that the girlfriend delivered the baby prematurely nine months and one day after he went UA). The Board opined that it was highly unlikely that he would have known of any difficulties associated with the pregnancy at th e time of his departure . The Applicant provides no document ation that he informed his chain of command of family problems and did not receive the assistance, leave, or help he asked for. Additionally, the Applicant makes no mention of , nor provides documented proof that he attempted to use any one of the numerous family support programs for military service members. These programs and services, such as Family Advocacy, Navy – Marine Corps Relief Society, Red Cross, the Chaplain ’s Office , or Navy medical health personnel all provide services to members of the military, regardless of grade, in times of need. Relief denied.

Issue 4: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his discharge should be upgraded based on his record of service , which was good apart from a period of misconduct. Despite a Sailor’s prior record of se rvice, certain serious offenses , to include being UA for 161 days , warrant separation from the n aval service in order to maintain good order and discipline. An “Under Other Than Honorable C onditions ” discharge is warranted when significant negative aspects of a member’s conduct or performance of duty outweigh the positive aspects of the member’s military record. Relief 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 . 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, Reenlistment/RE-code, Employment/Educational Opportunities , 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 86 (Unauthorized absence).

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 | 2014_Navy | ND1400573

Original file (ND1400573.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Based on the Applicant’s voluntary request to be discharged from the Navy, command administratively processed for separation. A request for a waiver can be submitted during the processing of a formal application for reenlistment through a recruiter.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...
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100472

Original file (ND1100472.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant seeks an upgrade in order to reenlist into the Armed Forces. ” 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. There is no requirement or law that grants recharacterization solely...
NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700919

Original file (ND0700919.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Issue 2 ().Per regulation, members are eligible for an entry level separation within the first 180 days of their enlistment. ” 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. Additionally, the Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities.
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900415

Original file (ND0900415.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The NDRB determined the awarded discharge characterization was appropriate and an upgrade founded upon the Applicant’s record of service would be inappropriate. The NDRB determined it would be inappropriate to grant an upgrade based on following erroneous advice from a civilian attorney.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:...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900449

Original file (ND0900449.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 | 2010_Navy | ND1001638

Original file (ND1001638.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. Regulations limit the NDRB’s review to a determination of the propriety and equity of the discharge.The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) determines eligibility for post-service benefits, not the NDRB.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...
NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301023

Original file (ND1301023.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...
USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201237

Original file (MD1201237.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. 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...
USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1100498

Original file (MD1100498.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall PREGNANCY.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...
NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000196

Original file (ND1000196.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

– None stated on the DD Form 293, however, in reviewing the Applicant’s request for clemency to the Court-Martial Convening Authority, the Applicant contended that his misconduct was mitigated by his personal family issues and sought consideration in the form of clemency to reducing his Bad Conduct Discharge to an administrative separation with an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions characterization of service. The NDRB conducted a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901020

Similar Decisions