Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901147

Original file (ND0901147.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-YNSR, USNR

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20090330

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:         19940929 - 19950122 COG          Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 199 50123     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20010117      Highest Rank/Rate: YN3
Length of Service : Y ear ( s ) M onth ( s ) 06 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 56
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 3.0 ( 5 )      Behavior: 2. 2 ( 5 )        OTA: 2. 54

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):

Period of UA : 19981129-19981201 (2 DAYS) Discharged in absentia
Lost Time per DD214: 19990922-20010117 (501 DAYS)

NJP :
- 19961117 :       Art icle 86 (UA)
         Article 92 (Failure to report to Bachelor leases quarters for apartment inspection), 2 specifications
         Article 107 (False official statement)
         Awarded : Susp ended :
SPCM:

- 19990614 :       Art icle 121 , 3 specifications
         Specification 1: Steal U.S. Currency of a value of $200.00 on or about 19980723.
         Specification 2: Wrongfully appropriate a motor vehicle on or about 19980810.
         Specification 3: Wrongfully appropriate a motor vehicle on or about 19981103
         Article 134, 5 specifications
         Specification 1: With intent to defraud, wrongfully obtain services under false pretense from the Super 8 Motel, of a value of $72.31 on or about 19980609-19980611 .
         Specification 2: With intent to defraud, wrongfully obtain services under false pretense from Master Economy Inn, of a value of $164.46 on or about 19980612-19980615.
         Specification 3: With intent to defraud, wrongfully obtain services under false pretense from Alamo Rent-A-Car, of a value of $81.67 on or about 19980709.
         Specification 4: With intent to defraud, wrongfully obtain services under false pretense from National Car Rental, of a value of $1043.16 on or about 19980710.
         Specification 5: With intent to defraud, wrongfully obtain services under false pretense from Dollar Rent-A-Car, of a value of $347.76 on or about 19981030 .
         Sentence : CONF 120 DAYS RIR E-1 BCD

SCM:     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 :

Pertinent Regulation/Law

A. The Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 22, effective 15 December 1998 to
21 August 2002, Article 5815-010, Executing a Dishonorable or Bad Conduct Discharge.

B. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part IV, Para 403m(7)(a), Presumption Concerning Court-Martial Specifications .

C . 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. Discharge not warranted based on the infractions and no counseling.

Decision

Date: 2009 1022 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 Applicant’s case under the pertinent standards of equity to determine if any factors in this particular case merited clemency. The NDRB is authorized to grant clemency if warranted the evidence of record contains sufficient mitigating or extenuating factors to offset the seriousness of the offenses for which the discharge was awarded. The Applicant’s record of service included nonjudicial punishment ( ) for violations o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 86 ( Unauthorized absence (UA) – dur ation unknown ) , Article 92 ( Failure to obey a lawful order or regulation to report to bachelors leasing quarters – 2 specifications ), and Article 107 ( False official statement ; and special court- martial ( ) for violations of the UCMJ: Article 121 (Larceny – 1 specification and Wrongful appropriation – 2 specifications ) , and Article 134 (Wrongfully obtaining services with intent to defraud – 5 specifications) . Based on the offenses committed by the Applicant, she was convicted at a SPCM .

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends h er discharge was not warranted considering the type of infractions she was charged with , she never received counsel ing on how to use t h e American Express Card, and s he never received any compensation so that s he could make payments. The Applicant did not submit any documents for the Board’s consideration. In response to the Applicant’s issue, relevant and material facts stated in a court-martial specification are presumed by the NDRB to be established facts. Additionally, the Board determined that the Applicant ’s contentions regarding the lack of counseling on the use of her credit card and lack of funds to make payments on her account did not mitigate the misconduct that resulted in her discharge from the Navy . Furthermore, w ith respect to a discharge adjudged by a court-martial case, 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. After a thorough review of the Applicant’s record and issues submitted, the Board determined that clemency was not warranted and that the sentence awarded the Applicant at h er court-martial was appropriate for the offenses s he committed.

Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, and Applicant’s statement, 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 Marine | MD04-01471

Original file (MD04-01471.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION Age at Entry: 17 (Parental Consent) Years Contracted: 6 Education Level: 12 AFQT: 79 Highest Rank: LCpl MOS: 1141 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks): Proficiency: 3.6 (9) Conduct: 2.9 (10) Military Decorations: None Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: MUC Days of Unauthorized Absence: 248 Character, Narrative Reason, and Authority of Discharge (at time of issuance):UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS...
NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00699

Original file (ND02-00699.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged on 870424 with a bad conduct discharge which was the sentence adjudged by a properly constituted special court-martial that was determined to be legal and proper, affirmed by appellate review authority and executed (A and B). After a thorough review of applicant’s service record, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was...
USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-01356

Original file (MD03-01356.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION 950812: From confinement, to duty. 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 134, false pretenses.
USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600950

Original file (MD0600950.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged on 20050826 with a bad conduct discharge which was the sentence adjudged by a properly convened special court-martial. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board...
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0902349

Original file (MD0902349.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. The Applicant should be aware submission of these items alone does not guarantee clemency as each discharge is reviewed by the NDRB on a case-by-case basis.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 BAD...
NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00419

Original file (ND02-00419.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ND02-00419 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020221, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions. The Applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION
USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00270

Original file (MD02-00270.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Issues, as submitted 1 (Equity Issue) Pursuant to 10 USC 874 (b) (UCMJ, Article 74) and in accordance with SECNAVINST 5420.174C, enclosure (1), paragraph 2.24 and 9.3, this former member requests the Board's clemency relief with up-grade of his characterization of service under honorable conditions on the basis of his post-service conduct. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copies of DD Form 214...
NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00693

Original file (ND00-00693.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ND00-00693 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000508, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. haracter references educational achievements post service letters will follow.” The Board never received any additional information from the applicant, therefore no relief is granted based on this issue.In the applicant’s issue 3,...
USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1002320

Original file (MD1002320.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: Rehabilitation/Treatment: Criminal Records: Personal Documentation: Community Service: References: Department of VA letter: Other Documentation: Additional Statements:From Applicant: From/To Representation:From/ToCongress member: Pertinent Regulation/Law A. Paragraph 1105, DISCHARGE...
USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-01133

Original file (MD02-01133.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, NDRB discerned no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the Applicant’s service. Charge I : violation of the UCMJ, Article 123 (2 Specifications ): Specification 1 : On 910219, with intent to defraud, falsely make the signature of Col K. R. S_, USMC, upon SOI Special Order Number 1-91, which purported to authorize TAD orders, which said writing would, if genuine,...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901147

Similar Decisions