Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000226

Original file (ND1000226.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-RMSA, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20091027

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)        19990316 - 19990426     Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 19990427     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : 8 Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 19991216      Highest Rank/Rate: RMSA
Length of Service : Y ear s M onth s 19 D a ys
Education Level:        AFQT: 35
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: NFIR         Behavior: NFIR OTA: NFIR
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): NONE

Period of UA : 19991005 – 19991129 (55 Days)

NJP :     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:

Block 29, Dates of Time Lost During This Period, should read: “19991005 – 19991129”

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:          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. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 18, effective 12 December 1997 until
10 July 2000, 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 .

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

Applicant’s Issues

1. The Applicant seeks an upgrade to enhance educational opportunities.
2. The Applicant contends his youth and immaturity at the time of his offenses contributed to making poor choices that resulted in his misconduct and subsequent separation.
3. The Applicant believes his post-service conduct is worthy of consideration.

Decision

Date: 2010 1202 Location: Washington D.C. R epresentation :

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall IN L I EU OF TRIAL BY COURT MARTIAL .

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 complete d 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 requested to be Separated In Lieu of Trial by Court Martial (SILT) after having spent one month and 24 days in an Unauthorized Absence status. Per regulations, in order to attain approval for a SILT request, service members must have been afforded the opportunity to consult with a qualified counsel and submit a written statement. They must also fully understand the elements of the offense for which they were charged and that they must admit their guilt. They further certify a complete understanding of the negative consequences of their actions and that characterization of service could be Under Other Than Honorable Conditions, which might deprive them of virtually all veterans' benefits based upon their current enlistment, and that they might expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life in situations wherein the type of service rendered or the character of discharge received there from may have a bearing.

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant seeks an upgrade to enhance 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. Relief denied.

Issue 2: (Equity) The Applicant contends his youth and immaturity at the time of his offenses contributed to making poor choices that resulted in his misconduct and subsequent separation. While the Applicant may believe that he made poor decisions due to making youthful mistakes, the record clearly reflects that the Applicant was responsible for his actions at the time of his misconduct. In eight months of service, the Applicant was UA for almost two of those months. Relief denied.

Issue 3: (Equity) RELIEF NOT WARRANTED The Applicant believes his post-service conduct is worthy of consideration. The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. However, there is no law or regulation that provides an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in civilian life subsequent to leaving the service. 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 help support a post - service conduct upgrade includes, but is not limited to: a verifiable continuous employment record; marriage and children’s birth certificate s (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; attending or completing higher education (official transcripts) ; and documentation of a drug - free lifestyle. C ompletion 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. Although the Applicant states he is more mature, has remarried and has children, has had no involvement with the civilian authorities , has remained drug and alcohol free, and is pursuing a degree, he provided no evidence to support an upgrade. 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 T herefore, 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, Reenlistment/RE-code , Employment/Educational Opportunities, 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 | 2011_Navy | ND1102077

Original file (ND1102077.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. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities.
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100808

Original file (ND1100808.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 | 2014_Navy | ND1401078

Original file (ND1401078.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)19980730 - 19980813Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 19980814Age at Enlistment:Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:19991005Highest Rank/Rate:DCFRLength of Service:Year(s)Month(s) 21 Day(s)Education Level:AFQT: 42EvaluationMarks:NONEAwards and Decorations (per DD 214):NONEPeriod of UA: 19990127 – 19990916, 232...
USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1500126

Original file (MD1500126.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant could have provided documentation as detailed in the Post-Service Conduct paragraph in the Addendum , however, completion of these items alone does not guarantee an upgrade from an unfavorable discharge as each discharge is reviewed by the Board on a case by case basis to determine if post-service conduct establishes that the in-service misconduct was an aberration. Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service,...
NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0701011

Original file (ND0701011.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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 error(s) on the original DD Form 214: “ PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT ” The NDRB will recommend to the Commander, Navy Personnel Command, that the DD 214 be corrected as appropriate. ” Additional...
NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700891

Original file (ND0700891.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The record factually supports the reason for discharge, supports the procedural correctness of discharge, and supports the decision of the Separation Authority that discharge was warranted.4 ().There is no law or regulation which provides that an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in civilian life subsequent to leaving the service. After a complete review of the entire record, including the evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board...
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101431

Original file (ND1101431.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant seeks an upgrade to enhance employment opportunities. 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 :...
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101470

Original file (ND1101470.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to:HARDSHIP Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 19991129Age at Enlistment:Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20030514Highest Rank/Rate:SALength of Service: Inactive: Years Months01 Day Active Years Months15 DaysEducation Level:AFQT: NFIREvaluationMarks:Performance:NFIRBehavior:NFIROTA: NFIRAwards and Decorations:NONEPeriods of...
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101110

Original file (ND1101110.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 | 2012_Navy | ND1200240

Original file (ND1200240.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant seeks an upgrade to qualify for the G.I. Representation: NONE 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...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000226

Similar Decisions