Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0902070

Original file (ND0902070.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-AZ3, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20090721

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)        20030321 - 20030922     Active: 20030923 – 20070614 HON

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 200 70615     Age at Enlistment: 25
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20090707      Highest Rank/Rate: AZ3
Length of Service : Y ear ( s ) M onth ( s ) 15 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 67
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 3.5 ( 4 )      Behavior: 2.2 ( 4 )        OTA: 2.99

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle Pistol ESWS

NJP :
- 20090617 :       Article ( Unauthorized absence )
         Awarded : RESTR Susp ended: NFIR

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:

         “ CONTINUOUS HONORABLE ACTIVE SERVICE FROM 030923 UNTIL 070614 ”

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 23, effective 12 June 2008 until 9 November 2009, 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 128 (Assault consummated by a battery upon a child under 16 years ).

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

Applicant’s Issues

1. The Applicant wants her characterization of service upgraded based on her record of service.

Decision

Date : 20 10 0713 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 governmental affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant. The Board did complete a thorough review of the circumstances that l ed to discharge and the discharge process to ensure discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety. The Applicant’s record of service included for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article (Unauthorized absence). Also, per the commands separation package, the Applicant was guilty of UCMJ Article 128 (Assault consummated by a battery upon a child under 16 years). The preponderance of the evidence supports that the Applicant beat her young daughter with a belt on multiple occasions. She failed to comply with Child Protective Services (CPS) and Family Advocacy Program (FAP) guidance to cease the child abuse , resulting in a FAP rehabilitation failure. At the time of the recommendation for separation, CPS had removed both children from the home. The Virginia Beach Police Department had been involved with another domestic case within the Applicant’s home and had transferred that case to the Nav al Criminal Investigative Service. Additionally, the Applicant was a two - time P hysical R eadiness T est failure due to failing the 1.5 mile runs. Based on the offense s committed by the Applicant, command administratively processed for separation. When notified of administrative separation processing using the procedure, the Applicant exercised rights to consult with a qualified counsel and to submit a written statement for consideration by the separating authority. The Applican t was not entitled to an administrative board.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant wants her characterization of service upgraded based on her record of service. Despite a Sailor’s prior record of se rvice, certain serious offenses, warrant separation from the Naval S ervice in order to maintain proper order and discipline. Commission of a serious offense does not require adjudication by nonjudicial or judicial proceedings or civilian conviction , however, the offense must be substantiated b y a preponderance of evidence. The evidence of record does not demonstrate that the Appli cant was not responsible for her conduct or that s he should not be held accountable for her actions. A General (Under Honorable Conditions) is appropriate if the member’s service has been honest and faithful but significant negative aspects of the member’s conduct or performance outweighs positive aspects of the member’s military record. The Board determined the Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of her service, reflected a significant departure from the conduct expected of a service member and the awarded characterization was appropriate . A n upgrade would be inappropriate. 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 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 | 2008_Navy | ND0801097

Original file (ND0801097.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

[Extracted from CO, TRIDENT Refit Facility letter 20050624].NJP:SCM:SPCM:CC:Retention Warning Counseling:NDRB Documentary Review Conducted (date): 20070510 NDRB Documentary Review Docket Number: ND06-00888 NDRB Documentary Review Findings: NO CHANGE WARRANTED 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101304

Original file (ND1101304.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The NDRB voted to upgrade the Applicant’s discharge to Honorable and to change the narrative reason for separation to Secretarial Authority.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, and discharge process, facts, and circumstances unique to this case,and taking into consideration his testimony,the Board found the discharge was inequitable. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801032

Original file (ND0801032.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Types of Documents Submitted/reviewedRelated to Military Service: DD 214: Service and/or 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 Member of Congress: Other Documentation (Describe): DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE...
NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1300539

Original file (ND1300539.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 governmentalaffairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include...
NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001251

Original file (ND1001251.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. The Applicant was separated...
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100343

Original file (ND1100343.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Based on the offense committed by the Applicant, his command administratively processed him for separation.After initial notification of administrative separation processing (for commission of a serious offense and family advocacy rehabilitation failure) using the procedure on 15 Jun 2009, the Applicant elected to exercise his rights to consult with a qualified counsel and request an administrative separation board. After review of all the available evidence, the ASB found the following:...
USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1000544

Original file (MD1000544.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant contends his rights were violated, because his command’s decision to conduct NJP proceedings based solely on allegations [instead of facts]did not afford him the opportunity to consult with counsel and properly prepare a defense. He also alleges the command’s Sergeant Major advised him not to file an appeal to the NJP conducted on 20 March 2009, further contending his rights were violated and that the command acted improperly.The NDRB found evidence in the Applicant’s service...
USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1400546

Original file (MD1400546.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

As such, this issue does not serve to provide a foundation upon which the NDRB can grant relief.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 years from the date of discharge. ”...
NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301092

Original file (ND1301092.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of ServicePrior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)20030513 - 20040127Active:Pre-Service Drug Waiver: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20040128Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20070918Highest Rank/Rate: AZ3Length of Service: Year(s)Month(s)22 Day(s)Education Level:AFQT: 64EvaluationMarks:Performance:4.0(4)Behavior:3.51(4)OTA: 3.91Awards and...
NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001057

Original file (ND1001057.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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 eligible for a personal appearance hearing for a period of fifteen years from the date of discharge. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted,...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0902070

Similar Decisions