Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901711

Original file (ND0901711.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-RMSA, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20090604

Characterization of Service Received:

Narrative Reason for Discharge:

Authority for Discharge: MILPERSMAN 3630600 [COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE]

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

Summary of Service
Prior Service:
Inactive:         US N R (DEP)        19931103 - 19940123     Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 19940124     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 19960405      Highest Rank/Rate: RMSN
Length of Service : Y ear ( s ) M onth ( s ) 18 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 56
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 4.0 ( 1 )      Behavior: 4.0 ( 1 )        OTA: 3.80

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):

Period of C ONF : NJP:        SPCM: CC:     Retention Warning Counseling :

S CM :
- 19960228 :       Art icle 86 (U nauthorized absence, 19951014-19960108, 55 days)
         Sentence :

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. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 9, effective 22 July 1994 until 2 October 1996, Article 3630600, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL 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, more then 30 days) .

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

Applicant’s Issues

1.        Wants to r eturn to the Navy as a full - or part- time Sailor .
2.       Thought his d ischarge would have change d to H onorable after six months.
3. Asked for medical assistance and was not helped.

Decision

Date : 20 10 0318             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 discharge 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 of the UCMJ: Article 86 ( Unauthorized absence , 19951014-19960108, 55 days) . Based on the offense committed by the Applicant, command administratively processed for separation. 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 .

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant is requesting to return to the Navy as full- or part-time Sailor. 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 Board 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.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant thought his discharge would be upgraded to Honorable after six months, but didn’t realize he needed to fill out the paperwork. There is no law or regulation that authorizes a discharge to be automatically upgraded after six months. A former service member has 15 years, from the date of discharge, to petition the Board for consideration of an upgrade. The Board does not automatically upgrade a discharge after six months. Relief denied.

Issue 3: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends he had a medical problem that was completely ignored by the medical staff. The government enjoys a presumption of regularity in the conduct of its affairs. The Applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support his issue. There is no evidence in his record s , nor has the Applicant produced any evidence, to support the contention that he was denied any medial treatment . The Applicant’s statements alone do not overcome the government’s presumption of regularity in this case. 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, 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 Disabled American 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 their 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 | 2010_Navy | ND1000456

Original file (ND1000456.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Based on the offenses committed by the Applicant, command administratively processed for separation.Based on the Article 112a violation, processing for administrative separation is mandatory.When notified of administrative separation processing using the procedure, the Applicant waived rights to consult with a qualified counsel, to submit a written statement for consideration by the separating authority, and to request an administrative board. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review...
USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1000765

Original file (MD1000765.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Regulations limit the NDRB’s review to a determination of the propriety and equity of the discharge in administrative separations or clemency in the case of a court-martial-awarded punitive discharge.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, Special Court-Martial Record of Trial and punitive discharge process, the Board found the discharge was equitable at the time of discharge. ” Additional Reviews : After a...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801048

Original file (ND0801048.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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 evidence submitted by the Applicant.The Applicant’s record of...
NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1400838

Original file (ND1400838.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends his discharge was based on an isolated incident in 36 months of service with no other adverse action.2. ” 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301786

Original file (ND1301786.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends his misconduct near the end of his enlistment was an isolated incident.2. Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entriesand discharge process, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reason for separation shall remain...
USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1101963

Original file (MD1101963.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to:COMPLETION OF REQUIRED ACTIVE SERVICE Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USMCR (DEP)19980430 - 19980518Active: 19900109 - 19960108 HON Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 19980519Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: Years MonthsDate of Discharge:20030314Highest Rank:Length of Service: Years Months04 DaysEducation Level: AFQT:56MOS: 3533Proficiency/Conduct Marks (# of...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901043

Original file (ND0901043.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’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. Automatic Upgrades - There is no law or regulation that provides for an unfavorable discharge to be upgraded based solely on the passage of time...
USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1101776

Original file (MD1101776.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, the Applicant’s statements, and discharge process, the Board found,by a majority rule, that Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reason for separation shall remain .Since 15 years have elapsed since the...
NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200050

Original file (ND1200050.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. Narrative Reason for Separation: In accordance with the 20 September 2011 Under Secretary of Defense (Personnel & Readiness) memorandum regarding the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” service discharge review boards should normally grant requests to change the narrative reason for discharge wherein Homosexual Admission was the only basis for discharge. ” Additional Reviews...
USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700903

Original file (MD0700903.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Upon agreement by the Applicant’s Commanding Officer, this was reviewed and changed to general (under honorable conditions) upon completion of investigative support provided by the Applicant. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Medical and Service Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found that Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214 The NDRB did note administrative...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901711

Similar Decisions