Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901057

Original file (ND0901057.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-ETSN, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20090318

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)        20010220 - 20010627     Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment: 20010628     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20051021      Highest Rank/Rate: ET3
Length of Service : Y ear ( s ) M onth ( s ) 24 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 96
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: NFIR         Behavior: NFIR OTA: NFIR

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):

Periods of C ONF : NONE

NJP :
- 20050913 :       Art icle 86 (UA), 5 specifications
         Specifications 1-4: 0600-1200, 20060806; 0600-0900, 20050708; 0600-1200, 20050707; 0600-0900, 20050912
         Specification 5: Failure to go
         Awarded : Susp ended :

S CM :

SPCM:

C C :

Retention Warning Counseling :

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

The NDRB did note administrative error(s) on the original DD Form 214:

         “ 04 years, 03 months, 24 days ”

The NDRB will recommend to the C ommander, Navy Personnel Command , that the DD 214 be corrected as appropriate.

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. Navy Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 11, 29 April 2005 until Present, Article 1910-152, SEPARATION BY REASON OF ALCOHOL ABUSE REHABILITATION FAILURE.

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 .

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

Applicant’s Issues

1. Ineligible for the GI Bill.
1. Upgrade to honorable, based on the amount of time I spent in the USN.
2. Discharge b ased on one mistake I made during my active duty.

Decision

Date : 20 0 9 0917 Location: Washington D.C . R epresentation :

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 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 for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 86 ( UA , 5 specifications, 0600-1200, 20060806; 0600-0900, 20050708; 0600-1200, 20050707; 0600-0900, 20050912 and a failure to go ) . In addition, the Applicant was referred by his command on April 6, 2005 to the Substance Abuse Rehabilitation Program (SARP) , where he was diagnosed with a lcohol d ependence by a licensed professional provider and recommended to attend Level III treatment. On April 15, 2005 the Applicant was arrested for a DUI . The Applicant was th e n discharge d on July 14, 2005 from Level III treatment with a poor prognosis for further recovery as a result of noncompliance with program rules and regulation, and was determined to be an alcohol rehabilitation failure. The Applicant was discharged with a narrative reason of “Alcohol Rehabilitation Failure . ” Based on the offense s committed by the Applicant , command administratively processed for separation —processing for administrative separation was mandatory for alcohol treatment failure . When processed for a dministrative s eparation, the Applicant waived rights to consult with qualified counsel and submit a written statement.

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant contends his mistake made him ineligible for the GI Bill benefits . 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. The Department of Veterans Affairs determines eligibility for educational benefits.

Issues 2-3 : (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his discharge should be upgrade to honorable, as his current discharge is base d on one isolated incident during his time in the Navy. Despite a Sailor’s prior record of se rvice, certain serious offenses, even though isolate d, warrant separation from the n aval se rvice in order to maintain good order and discipline —the Applicant’s offenses, to include the DUI incident and his alcohol treatment failure, met this standard.

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, 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

USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1100059

Original file (MD1100059.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’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. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities.
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801817

Original file (ND0801817.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 accomplishments help demonstrate previous in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member’s overall character.Besides the Applicants statement on the DD Form 293, he provided no additional documents or any other evidence on his behalf. The Board...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800629

Original file (ND0800629.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

In the Applicant’s case the commanding officer appropriately exercised his discretion in denying the Applicant’s request for religious accommodations while on restriction.In response to the allegation the NJP was too harsh, and the command failed to transport the Applicant to medical appointments, the Board also concurs with the Naval Inspector General’sfindings of 20070509, wherein, it is noted the Applicant failed to exercise his right to appeal the NJP within the time limit prescribed and...
NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1500065

Original file (ND1500065.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant’s record of service included NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13) warnings, for of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 86 (Absence without leave; 6 specifications) and Article 108 (Military property of the United States-sale, loss, damage, destruction, or wrongful disposition, 1 specification), and three civilian convictions for (Reckless driving, 2 counts), (Suspended license, 1 count), (Distribution of a controlled substance, 1 count) and (Conspiracy, 2 counts). ...
USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1001398

Original file (MD1001398.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant was subsequently separated from the Marine Corps on 29 Jan 2009 with an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge due to Misconduct (Drug Abuse). Relief Denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries and the administrative separation process, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reason for separation shall remain .The Applicant remains...
USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1200093

Original file (MD1200093.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

When notified of administrative separation processing using the procedure, the Applicant waived rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request an administrative board.The Applicant provided additional documentation in the form of a U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)awards letter for the NDRB’s consideration or to rebut the Government’s presumption of regularity that was not already documented in his official military record of service and medical...
NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500927

Original file (ND0500927.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

960201: Punishment of RIR to AOAA, forfeit $213 pay per month for 1 month, and 7 days extra duty suspended at CO’s NJP of 951116 vacated this date due to continued misconduct.Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (Commanding Officer’s non-judicial punishment of 960201 for unauthorized absence from 0600, 951202 to 1200, 951202; and for unauthorized absence from 0600, 960113 to 1010, 969113), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further...
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101114

Original file (ND1101114.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Summary of ServicePrior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)19980825 - 19990621Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 19990622Age at Enlistment:Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20010907Highest Rank/Rate:FC3Length of Service:Year(s)Month(s) 17 Day(s)Education Level:AFQT: 82EvaluationMarks:Performance:NFIRBehavior:NFIROTA: NFIRAwards and Decorations (per DD 214):NONEPeriods of...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801175

Original file (ND0801175.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. 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. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a...
USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1001817

Original file (MD1001817.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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. 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 . ”...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901057

Similar Decisions