Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0902212

Original file (ND0902212.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-ADAA, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20090805

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)        20000211 - 20000312     Active: R        19990520 - 19990715 ELS

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20000313     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20020412      Highest Rank/Rate: ADAN
Length of Service : Y ear ( s ) M onth ( s ) 00 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 36
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: NFIR         Behavior: NFIR OTA: NFIR

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):

NJP :
- 20010322 :       Article (U nauthorized absence )
         Article (Failure to obey an order or regulation)
         Awarded: CC U Suspended:

- 20020307 :      Article (U nauthorized absence - 3specifications , which included a 6 day UA)
         Article 89 (Disrespect to a superior commissioned officer)
         Article 91 (Insubordinate conduct by being disrespectful in language and gestures - 3 specifications )
         Article 92 (Failure to obey an order or regulation)
         Article 107 (False official statement)
         Awarded : Susp ended:

S CM : SPCM: C C :

Retention Warning Counseling :
- 20010322 :       For substandard performance, unauthorized absences and Commanding Officer’s nonjudicial punishment.

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

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

         “ 00 MAR 12 ”
         “ 02 01 00 ”
         “ UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS ”
         “ PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT ”
         “ 011205-011210 ”

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 22, effective 15 December 1998 until 21 August 2002,
Article 1910-140, SEPARATION BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT - PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT.

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. The Applic ant believes he has earned the right to receive benefits.
2. The Applicant contends that the Navy didn’t give him enough time to get qualified or advance and that his command denied him a transfer and so he resigned .

Decision
Date: 2010 0810 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 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 NAV PERS 1070/613 (Page 13) warning and for o f the Uniform Code of M ilitary Justice (UCMJ): Article (Unauthorized absence - 4 specifications, which included a 6 - day UA), Article 89 (Disrespect to a superior commissioned officer), Article 91 (Insubordinate conduct by being disrespectful in language and gestures - 3 specifications), Article 92 (Failure to obey an order or regulation - 2 specifications) , and Article 107 (False official statement) . Based on the offenses 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, to submit a written statement for consideration by the separating authority, and to request an administrative board.

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant believes he has earned the right to receive 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.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends that the Navy didn’t give him enough time to learn his job and advance and would not transfer him to another command, so he decided to resign. Although the Applicant may feel he resigned, the command actually administratively separated him involuntarily due to his pattern of misconduct. His C ommanding O fficer stated that the Applicant “chose a path of non-compliance with rules and regulations despite command intervention, which included personal and professional counseling, training, and assistance. His immaturity and failure to conform to the Navy Core Values and standards have placed a serious operational and administrative burden on this command and have been detrimental to good order and discipline. ” Additionally, charges were referred to a Special Court-Martial due to the Applicant’s voluntarily admission of drug use (marijuana ) but w ere cancelled due to continued misconduct. Violation of Article 112a is one such offense requiring mandatory processing, regardless of time in service or grade, for an administrative separation that usually results in an unfavorable characterization of discharge. Commanders may also pursue confinement and a punitive discharge (i.e., Bad Conduct or Dishonorable) through a S pecial or G eneral C ourt- M artial. The command did not refer the Applicant for a court - martial but opted instead for an administrative discharge. The NDRB determined that the discharge was warran ted as issued.

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, Service Benefits 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 | 2014_Navy | ND1401117

Original file (ND1401117.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

” 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. 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. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a...
USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1001965

Original file (MD1001965.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

: (Decisional)() .The Applicant requested the NDRB consider post-service conduct as a basis to gain a more thorough understanding of performance and conduct during the period of service under review. ” 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...
USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1101682

Original file (MD1101682.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/To Congress member: Pertinent Regulation/Law A. The NDRB voted...
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900715

Original file (MD0900715.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to:CONVENIENCE OF THE GOVERNMENT Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USMCR (DEP)20010112 - 20010526Active:USMCR (School) 20010527-20041008 Period of Service Under Review: Date of Appointment: 20041009Age at Enlistment: Years Contracted: Years MonthsDate of Discharge:20081121Highest Rank: 1stLtLength of Service: Year(s)Month(s)13 Day(s)Education Level: MOS: 3002Officer’s Fitness reports: All officer performance...
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101244

Original file (ND1101244.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. Relief denied.Issue 5: (Decisional) () .The Applicant contends his post-service conduct warrants consideration for upgrading his discharge to General (Under Honorable Conditions)....
USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1000412

Original file (MD1000412.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. 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...
USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1200470

Original file (MD1200470.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 | 2008_Navy | ND0801502

Original file (ND0801502.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Additionally, there is sufficient evidence to substantiate discharge for misconduct due to the commission of serious offenses and the fact the misconduct did not occur “back to back” as the Applicant contends is of no consequence since all of the NJP’s which led to the Applicant’s discharge occurred during the current enlistment as required under MILPERSMAN 1910 -210.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record Entries, Discharge...
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101076

Original file (ND1101076.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)20000630 - 20000907Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20000908Age at Enlistment:Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20050419Highest Rank/Rate:FNLength of Service:Years Months11 DaysEducation Level:AFQT: 42EvaluationMarks:Performance:NFIRBehavior:NFIROTA: NFIRAwards and Decorations (per DD 214):NAVY”E ” NJP:NONE CC:...
USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801072

Original file (MD0801072.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The CA, per the requirements set out in paragraph 4003 of MCO P5800.16A (Marine Corps Manual for Legal Administration) forwarded the report of NJP to CMC (JAM), with the recommendation the applicant's letter of resignation be accepted and the Applicant be discharged with a “ General (Under Honorable Conditions)” characterization of service. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0902212

Similar Decisions