Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000958

Original file (ND1000958.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-DCFN, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20100302

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)        20001227 - 20010621     Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20010622 (w/out Time Lost) Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20050624      Highest Rank/Rate: DC3
Length of Service : Y ear ( s ) M onth ( s ) 03 D a y ( s ) - (with time lost calculated: 3 yrs, 11 months, 27 days)
Education Level:        AFQT: 38
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 2.5 ( 2 )      Behavior: 2.0 ( 2 )        OTA: 2.50

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      (x2), (x2), (x2),
Periods of UA: 20030502 – 20030508 (6 days)
Periods of C ONF :

NJP :
- 20020605 :      Article (UA 20030502-20030508, 6 days)
         Awarded: Suspended:

- 20050617 :      Article (Larceny)
         Article 109 (Destruction of property other than military)
         Awarded: Suspended:

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:

         “ MISCONDUCT (SERIOUS OFFENSE) ”

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:                  Oth er Documentation:
                  Additional Statements :
         From Applicant:          From /To Representation:          From /To Congress m ember :

Pertinent Regulation/Law

A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 11, effective 26 April 2005 until 11 June 2008,
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 109 .

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

Applicant’s Issues

1.        Nondecisional issues: The Applicant seeks an upgrade in the characterization of his service at discharge to General (Under Honorable Conditions) so that he may be eligible to continue to serve his country.

2.       Decisional issues : The Applicant did not identify any issues of propriety or equity related to his discharge for consideration by the NDRB .

Decision

Date: 20 1 1 0407            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 NDRB 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 Applicant did not identify any decisional issues for the NDRB’s consideration; however, the NDRB completed a thorough review of the circumstances that led to the Applicant’s discharge, and the discharge process, to ensure the discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety.

The Applicant’s record of service reflects entry into the military without waiver at age 17 for a four-y ear contract with no extension. He enlisted with a guaranteed training program for the Seafarer to Fireman Apprenticeship Training Program. Throughout his enlistment period, the Applicant received no NAVPERS 1070/613 retention-counseling warnings. The Applicant’s period of enlistment under review did , however , include two nonjudicial punishments for violation of the following Articles of the Uniform Code of Military Justice:

•         Article 86 (Absence without leave , specifically, absented himself from his unit without authority from 20030502 to 20030508, 6 days time lost credited to enlistment contract)
•         Article 121 (Larceny , not otherwise specified)
•         Article 109 (Loss, damage, destruction of property other than military property of U.S.) .

The Applicant was notified of the Commanding Officer’s recommendation for administrative separation on 19 June 2005. The NDRB was unable to verify the Applicant’s notification of rights and acknowledgment and presume d regularity in governmental affairs in this case in the absence of a complete discharge package in his service record. However, the Applicant’s Form DD-214 documents a separation code of HKQ - Misconduct by commission of a serious offense, administrative discharge board warranted, but waived. On 19 June 2005 , the Command submitted its recommendation for discharge to the Separation Authority, recommending separation based on the commission of a serious offense. On 22 June 2005 , the Separation Authority approved the recommendation for separation, designating that the basis for separation be MISCONDUCT (Serious Offense) - having determined that the evidence of record supported the basis for discharge - and that the characterization of service, as recommended - Under Other Than Honorable Conditions , was warranted. The Applicant was discharged on 24 June 2005 with an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions characterization of his service; he was further advised that he was not recommended for future re-enlistment and was assigned a reentry code of RE-4 on his Form DD-214.

Nondecisional Issue - The Applicant seeks an upgrade in the characterization of his service at discharge to General (Under Honorable Conditions) so that he may be eligible to continue to serve his country. There is no requirement, or law, that grants re-characterization s olely on the issue of improving reenlistment opportunities; regulations limit the NDRB’s review solely to a determination of the propriety and the equity of a discharge. As such, this issue does not serve to provide a foundation upon which the Board can grant relief. Additionally, the NDRB has no jurisdiction over reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Navy, Marine Corps, or any other of the armed forces and is not authorized to change a reentry code. The Applicant may petition the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) using DD Form-149. When requesting this change, the Applicant should provide as much documentation as possible regarding the reason a change is warranted. The BCNR’s address is: Board for Correction of Naval Records, 2 Navy Annex, Washington, DC 20370-5100. Further information can be found online at http://www.donhq.navy.mil/bcnr/bcnr.htm .

( Board Issue ) ( ) . The Applicant did not identify any issues of propriety or equity related to his discharge for consideration by the NDRB. However, the NDRB completed a thorough review of the circumstances that led to the Applicant’s discharge, and the discharge process, to ensure the discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety. In accordance with Article 1910-142 of the MILPERSMAN, service members may be separated based on the commission of a serious military offense when the Commanding Officer believes the specific circumstances of the offense warrant separation and the offense would warrant a punitive discharge if adjudicated at trial by court - martial for the same or closely related offense. The Applicant’s violation of Articles 109 and 121 of the UCMJ both warrant punitive discharge and confinement for up to one year , if adjudicated at trial by court - martial. Based on a review of the evidence of record and circumstances unique to this case, the NDRB determined that the Applicant’s misconduct did properly satisf y the requirements established by the MILPERSMAN for separation based on the commission of a serious offense as a basis for discharge. Moreover, despite a servicemember’s prior record of service , certain serious offenses, even though isolated, warrant separation from the Navy to maintain proper order and discipline. As such, the NDRB determined there was no impropriety because of an error of fact, law, procedure, or discretion with the discharge. Relief based on propriety, denied.

A service member’s characterization of service is founded on the recognition of his performance and conduct and is not necessarily dependent upon the narrative reason for separation. When the quality of a member’s service has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for military personnel, it is appropriate to characterize that service under Honorable conditions. A General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge is appropriate if the member’s service has been honest and faithful, but significant negative aspects of the member’s conduct or performance outweigh the positive aspects of the member’s military record. However, an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge is warranted when a member engages in conduct involving one or more acts or omissions that constitute a significant departure from the conduct expected of members of the Naval Service. Based on the seriousness of the offense s, coupled with the previous misconduct of record, the Command recommended separation with an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions characterization of service at discharge.

Upon review of the Applicant’s record of service, the NDRB determined the Applicant engaged in conduct involving one or more acts or omissions that constituted a significant departure from the conduct expected of members of the Naval Service. The NDRB found the characterization of the Applicant's discharge was equitable and was consistent with the characterization of discharge given others in similar circumstances. 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 NDRB determined that 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 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 | ND1000580

Original file (ND1000580.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant’s characterization of service at discharge was determined by the Separation Authority to be Under Other than Honorable Conditions and the Applicant was further assigned a re-enlistment code of RE-4 (not recommended for reenlistment). The NDRB determined that the characterization of service at discharge was appropriate as issued and that an upgrade would be inappropriate; accordingly, no relief is provided. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted,...
NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000312

Original file (ND1000312.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant provided no credible evidence to rebut the command’s decision to separate him with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge for misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense. ” 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000316

Original file (ND1000316.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall (SERIOUS OFFENSE).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. The administrative board voted unanimously to recommend to the separating authority to separate the Applicant with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has...
USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1000276

Original file (MD1000276.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: DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD...
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101117

Original file (ND1101117.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 in order to reenlist into the Armed Forces. A request for a waiver can be submitted during the processing of a formal application for reenlistment through a recruiter.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...
NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1300837

Original file (ND1300837.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 | 2009_Navy | ND0900628

Original file (ND0900628.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. The Board determined the characterization of service received 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.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record Entries,...
NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1500364

Original file (ND1500364.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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 violations of the UCMJ, Articles 91, 128, 121, 109, 134. 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 remain UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800354

Original file (ND0800354.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request: Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USNR (DEP)19970620 - 19980608Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 19980609Period of enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20030502Length of Service: Yrs Mths24 DysEducation Level: Age at Enlistment:AFQT: 34Highest Rank/Rate:HM3Evaluation marks:Performance: 3.4(5) Behavior:3.2(5)OTA: 3.15Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):,,Periods of UA/CONF:...
NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0601037

Original file (ND0601037.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

There is credible evidence in the record that the Applicant committed Robbery and used a firearm during the robbery in question. The NDRB found that the Applicant's service was equitably characterized. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Service Record Entries, Medical Record Entries, Elements of Discharge and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found the Applicant’s discharge proper and equitable.

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000958

Similar Decisions