Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0902361

Original file (ND0902361.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-MM3, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20090820

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)        19980812 - 19990711     Active:          19990712 - 20021121

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20021122     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20050715      Highest Rank/Rate: MM3
Length of Service : Y ear ( s ) M onth ( s ) 24 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 52
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 4.0 ( 2 )      Behavior: 3.5 ( 2 )        OTA: 3.72

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):

Periods of UA :   20041217 - 20050622 ( 187 days )             C ONF :

NJP :
- 20041216 :      NFIR
         Awarded: NFIR Suspended: NFIR
         Extracted from NAVPERS 1070/604 (REV.7/91) AWARDS page

S CM :

SPCM: Charges were preferred for violation of UCMJ Article 86 (Unauthorized absence, which she was in an unauthorized absence for 187 days). The Applicant requested to be separated in lieu of trial by court-martial. The command and higher authority approved the request and discharged the Applicant accordingly.

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:

         Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, should read: “ NAVY "E" RIBBON , GOOD CONDUCT MEDAL , SEA SERVICE DEPLOYMENT RIBBON, NATIONAL DEFENSE SERVICE MEDAL, NAVY UNIT COMMENDATION ”
         “CONTINUOUS HONORABLE ACTIVE SERVICE FROM 990712 UNTIL 021121 ”

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 31 May 2005 until Present, Article 1910-106, SEPARATION IN LIEU OF TRIAL BY COURT-MARTIAL.

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)(b), 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. The Applicant seeks an upgrade to reenlist in the Army Reserve .
1 . The Applicant contends her misconduct was due to depression, which was ignored by her chain of command.

Decision

Date: 2010 09 16 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 , which was extracted from the Awards page in her service record . The NDRB does not know the specifics of the violations but does recognize that the Applicant began her 187 - day unauthorized absence (UA) the day following her NJP. Based on the 187 - day UA, c harges were preferred for violation of UCMJ Article 86 (Unauthorized absence). On 23 June 2005 , the Applicant requested an administrative discharge U nder O ther T han H onorable C onditions in lieu of trial by court-martial. She declined to consult with counsel but was fully advised of the implications of her request. The Applicant understood that if discharged u nder o ther than honorable conditions, it might deprive her of virtually all veterans benefits based upon her current enlistment . The Applicant stated s he understood the elements of the offenses with which she was charged. Sh e admitted s he was guilty of violating Article 86 (Unauthorized absence).

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant seeks an upgrade to reenlist in the Army Reserve. 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 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 contends her disciplinary problems were the result of depression, which was ignored by her chain of command. There is no indication in the Applicant’s service record that she sought assistance for her depression through one of the many services offered to Sailors nor did the Applicant provide any documentation to support her claims. Due to the seriousness of her offense, which could have resulted in her prosecution as a deserter, her command properly referred her to court-martial. There is nothing to indicate that the Applicant was not responsible for her actions. The NDRB found that the Applicant's service was equitably characterized. Relief denied.

Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, medical and 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, Reenlistment/RE-code , 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 | ND1001616

Original file (ND1001616.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: OR GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE)Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)20030609 - 20040210Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20040211Age at Enlistment:Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20071005Highest Rank/Rate:MM3Length of Service: Years Month18 DaysEducation Level:AFQT: 73EvaluationMarks:Performance:2.5(2)Behavior:2.0(2)OTA: 2.2Awards and Decorations...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801022

Original file (ND0801022.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): DD Form 149 DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900418

Original file (ND0900418.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant Complaint Procedures : If you believe that 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900049

Original file (ND0900049.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Board determined the characterization of service received, “Under Other Than HonorableConditions”, was an appropriate characterization considering the length of service and the UCMJ violations involved and, based on the lack of post service documentation provided an upgrade would be inappropriate.Should the Applicant obtain additional evidence he may wish to apply for a personal appearance. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service,...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800728

Original file (ND0800728.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Based on the lack of evidence submitted by the Applicant, the NDRB determined an upgrade would be inappropriate.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant Complaint Procedures : If you believe that the decision in your case is unclear, not responsive to the issues you raised, or does not otherwise comport...
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101094

Original file (ND1101094.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)20010830 - 20011003Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20011004Age at Enlistment:Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20060808Highest Rank/Rate:MM3Length of Service:Year(s)Month(s) 06 Day(s)Education Level:AFQT: 32EvaluationMarks:Performance:NFIRBehavior:NFIROTA: NFIRAwards and Decorations (per DD 214):Periods of...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800867

Original file (ND0800867.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Board determined an upgrade waswarranted.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found Pertinent Regulation/Law A. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years from the date of discharge. Whenever a member is...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900700

Original file (ND0900700.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

In fact, the Applicant must have had legal representation in order to properly undergo the request for a separation in lieu of trial by court-martial to his command. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant Complaint Procedures : If you believe that the decision in your case is unclear, not responsive to...
NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000776

Original file (ND1000776.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 | ND0901701

Original file (ND0901701.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The NDRB determined the Applicant met the requirements for separation by reason of misconduct – commission of a serious offense and the awarded characterization of service was 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 remain . ” Additional Reviews : After a...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0902361

Similar Decisions