Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901926

Original file (ND0901926.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-SKSA, USNR

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20090701

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:         NONE              Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20070830     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20080606      Highest Rank/Rate:
Length of Service:
         Inactive:        Y ear( s ) M onth( s ) 07 D a y ( s )
         Active   Y ear( s ) M onth( s ) 01 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 47
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: N/A          Behavior: N/A    OTA: N/A

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP :

- 20080515 :      Article (Larceny)
         Awarded: Susp ended:

S CM :    SPCM:    C C :

Retention Warning Counseling :

- 20080528 :       For larceny.

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

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

         “ UNCHARACTERIZED ”

The NDRB will recommend to the Commander, 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 /To Representat ion :          From /To Congress m ember :

Oth er Documentation :

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 121 , (Larceny) .

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

Applicant’s Issues

1.        Wants reentry code changed for reenlistment purposes .
2.       Took items from Navy Exchange (NEX) by mistake .
3.       Post-service conduct.

Decision

Date: 20 10 0304             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 NAV PERS 1070/613 (Page 13) warning and one nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 121 ( Larceny of items from the Navy Exchange (NEX) ). 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 his rights to consult with a qualified counsel and submit a written statement ; he did not elect an administrative board .

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant has requested a change in his reentry code and indicates that he is trying to enlist into the Army. 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.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant submitted a personal statement wherein he contend s: 1) he did not intend to steal items from the NEX , 2) his son had requested that he get him something nice and while shopping he received a phone call from his wife regarding their car , and 3) he had a lot of things on his mind so without thinking , he walked out of the NEX with items that he had intended to purchase. The e vidence of record as contain ed in an in cident report of 27 April 2008 indicates the following: 1) the Applicant was placed under military apprehension for larceny and stated that he had purchased items , but was not given a receipt, 2) another individual indicated that he saw the Applicant carrying some bags and the Applicant had admitted to him he had tak e n “ some stuff” from the NEX and indicated that he would leave the bags at the galley after they finished eating , and 3) the Applicant was seen exiting the galley and leaving his shopping bag behind. Additionally, the Applicant admitted guilt to the larceny at NJP. The Applicant’s personal statement is contrary to the statement that he provided to the investigator at the time he committed the offense. The Board determined that based on the seriousness of the offense committed by the Applicant and the lack of extenuating circumstances a n upgrade in the characterization of service is not warranted. The NDRB advises the Applicant that with respect to non - service related administrative matters, i.e. Department of Veterans Affairs benefits, civilian employment, etc., an U ncharacterized separation shall be considered the equivalent of an Honorable or G eneral ( Under Honorable C onditions) characterization.

Furthermore, b y regulation, members notified of intended recommendation for discharge within the first 180 days of enlistment are eligible for an uncharacterized or entry-level separation characterization of service. Unless there were unusual circumstances regarding a servicemember’s performance or conduct that would merit an Honorable characterization, an U ncharacterized discharge is generally considered the most appropriate characterization of a member’s service. The Applicant's service record did not contain any unusual circumstances during his less than 5months of active duty service in the military to warrant a change of discharge to H onorable.
: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends that he is now a great human being and does not have a criminal record. He has submitted character references from two of his work supervisors, church member, and member of his neighbor h oo d for the Board’s consideration. 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 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. While the Board applauds the Applicant’s post-service efforts, the Board determined the evidence of post-service conduct did not mitigate the misconduct which precipitated the discharge. However, even if the Applicant could have produced additional evidence to support a review based on his post-service conduct, the Applicant should be aware that post-service conduct alone does not guarantee an upgrade.

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 and Automatic Upgrades .

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.

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.

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 | 2009_Navy | ND0900093

Original file (ND0900093.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Taking into consideration the Applicant’s in-service performance as evidenced by her overall trait average of 3.40 on a 4.0 scale, her post-service accomplishments, and the mitigating circumstances related to the offenses committed by the Applicant, the NDRB voted unanimously to upgrade the characterization of discharge to General (Under Honorable Conditions).Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, and...
NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001466

Original file (ND1001466.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. Relief warranted.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 change to. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are...
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0902225

Original file (MD0902225.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Board did complete a thorough review of the circumstances that led to discharge and the discharge process to ensure discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety.The Applicant’s record of service included 6105 counseling warnings and for of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article (Larceny, stole $160.00 from an ATM Machine, the property of another Marine).Based on the Applicant’s failure to adapt to the Marine Corps, command administratively processed for...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0902137

Original file (ND0902137.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.Wants to reenlist in the military. ” 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. If a former member has been discharged for more than 15 years, has already been granted a personal appearance...
NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1300383

Original file (ND1300383.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Summary of ServicePrior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)20080424 - 20080629Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20080630Age at Enlistment:Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20101021Highest Rank/Rate:HNLength of Service:Year(s)Month(s) 22 Day(s)Education Level:AFQT: 35EvaluationMarks:Performance:3.0(4)Behavior:2.3(4)OTA: 2.79Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):Periods of...
USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1001737

Original file (MD1001737.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The NDRB conducted a thorough review of the Applicant’s discharge under the pertinent standards of equity to determine if any factors in this particular case merited clemency. Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, the verbatim transcript record of trial by Special Court-Martial, and the discharge process, the NDRB determined that Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall BAD CONDUCT DISCHARGE...
USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1001556

Original file (MD1001556.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 . ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900523

Original file (ND0900523.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 Applicant DD Form 293, no documentation was provided for review. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the...
NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200804

Original file (ND1200804.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: DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900965

Original file (ND0900965.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.Seeking to reenlist and request my reentry code changed.2. The Applicant is seeking an upgrade in the characterization of her service to Honorable and a change in her narrative reason (unspecified) based on the contention that her discharge was incorrect becauseshe does not have asthma. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901926

Similar Decisions