Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001042

Original file (ND1001042.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-AMEAR, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20100318

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)        20020208 - 20020716     Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20020717     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20040806      Highest Rank/Rate: AMEAN
Length of Service : Y ear ( s ) M onth ( s ) 21 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 61
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 3.1 ( 3 )      Behavior: 2.5 ( 3 )        OTA: 2.11

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP :

- 20040518 :      Article (Failure to obey order or regulation) , 2 specifications
         Specification 1: Having knowledge of a lawful order issued by AME2 River s to muster in person upon returning from leave in New York on or about 13 May 2004, did fail to obey mustering.
         Specification 2: Having knowledge of a lawful order from LTJG McHugh to muster on 13 May 2004, did fail to obey the order.
         Awarded: Suspended:

- 200405 26 :      Article (Unauthorized Absence), 2 specifications
         Specification 1: On or about 25 May 2004, without authority, failed to go to appointed place of duty at the time prescribed, to wit: 1830 restriction muster.
         Specification 2: On or about 25 May 2004, without authority, failed to go to appointed place of duty at the time prescribed, to wit: 2130 restriction muster.
         Article (Failure to obey order or regulation), Having knowledge of a lawful order issued by Commander Miles, U.S. Navy, to report to restriction muster, did fail to obey the order by wrongfully failing to go to restriction muster.
         Awarded: Suspended:

- 20040714 :      Article (Unauthorized Absence) , On or about 8 July2004, without authority, failed to go to appointed place of duty at the time prescribed, to wit: Electronic Attack Squadron 139 physical training.
         Article (Insubordinate conduct toward a warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer) , On or about 9 July 2004, use disrespectful language toward Aviation Machinist Mate 3 ^rd Class Corner.
         Article , 2 specifications
         Specification 1: On or about 9 July 2004, f ail ed to obey a lawful order issued by Aircrew Survival Equipmentman 1 ^st Class Brody not to leave the flight deck of the USS John C. Stennis by leaving the flight deck.
         Specification 2: On or about 9 July 2004, failed to obey a lawful order issued by Aviation Machinist Mate 3 ^rd Class Corner to stay in maintenance control on board the USS John C. Stennis by wrongfully leaving maintenance control.
         Awarded: Suspended:

S CM :

SPCM:

C C :

- 20040517 :       Offense: Trespassing on local high school property
         Sentence : NFIR

Retention Warning Counseling:

- 20030624 :      For failure to meet body composition standards

- 20040518 :      For violation of the UCMJ Article 92 , Failure to obey order or regulation (2 specifications)

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), re-issued October 2002, effective 22 August 2002 until 25 April 2005, 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.       Applicant wants to receive benefits.
2.       Post service conduct warrants consideration for upgrading the characterization of service.

Decision

Date: 20 1 1 0505             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 g overnment al affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant. T he 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 NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13) warnings and nonjudicial punishments for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 86 ( Unauthorized a bsence , 3 specifications) , Article 91 (Insubordinate conduct toward a petty officer) , and Article 92 ( Failure to obey an order or regulation , 5 specifications ) . His record of service also included one civilian conviction for trespassing on high school property. 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, submit a written statement, and request an administrative board.

: (Non - decisional) The Applicant wants to receive v eterans benefits. The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs determines eligibility for post-service benefits, not the Naval Discharge Review Board. There is no requirement, or law, that grants re-characterization solely on the issue of obtaining v eterans benefits , and this issue does not serve to provide a foundation upon which the Board can grant relief. Regulations limit the Board’s review to a determination of the propriety and equity of the discharge.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant provided an additional personal statement and a character reference suggesting that he believes his post-service conduct warrants consideration for upgrading his discharge to H onorable. The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the re-characterization of a discharge. However, there is no law, or regulation, that provides that an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on good conduct in civilian life subsequent to leaving the service. The documentation the Applicant submitted along with the DD Form 293 w ere not sufficient to evaluate his post-service character and conduct. His efforts needed to have been more encompassing. For example, he could have provided evidence of the following: verifiable continuous employment record, certification of criminal history, character witness statements, documentation of community or church service, evidence of a drug-free existence, alcohol rehabilitation, official transcripts reflecting attendance at or completion of higher education, and evidence of financial stability. 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. Relief denied.

Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s s ummary of s ervice, r ecord e ntries, and d ischarge p rocess, 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 for additional information.

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 | 2006_Navy | ND0600102

Original file (ND0600102.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

980713: Commanding Officer, Patrol Squadron FIVE authorized Applicant’s discharge with a general (other than honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. At this time, the Applicant has not provided sufficient documentation of post service character and conduct to mitigate the misconduct that resulted in the characterization of discharge. The basis for his determination is clearly documented in the service record.
NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1400899

Original file (ND1400899.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)20020114 - 20020115Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20020116Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20040813Highest Rank/Rate: OSSNLength of Service: Year(s) Month(s) 28 Day(s)Education Level:AFQT: 80EvaluationMarks:Performance:1.8(4)Behavior:1.0(4)OTA: 1.46Awards and Decorations (per DD...
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100184

Original file (ND1100184.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant seeks an upgrade for educational benefits.2. The NDRB determined the Applicant’s medications were in no way related to the serious misconduct for which he was separated. ” 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000904

Original file (ND1000904.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

It also included summary courts-martial for of the UCMJ: Article 86 (Unauthorized absence, 12 specifications) and Article 134 (Breaking restriction, 2 specifications).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, submit a written statement, and request an administrative board. Relief denied.Summary:...
USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1401592

Original file (MD1401592.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant’s record of service included 6105 counseling warnings, for of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 86 (Absent without leave, seven specifications), and Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation, 2 specifications), and for of the UCMJ: Article 86 (Absent without leave, 9 specifications including one for 64 days), Article 95 (Resistance, flight, breach of arrest, and escape, 4 specifications), Article 134 (General article), and Article 112a (Wrongful use,...
NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301530

Original file (ND1301530.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge to help an Applicant’s life or to help him support his family. 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...
USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1400203

Original file (MD1400203.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 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. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are...
USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1500426

Original file (MD1500426.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant’s record of service included 6105 counseling warnings; for of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 86 (Absence without leave), Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation; 2 specifications), and Article 107 (False official statements); and for of the UCMJ: Article 86 (Absence without leave; 3 specifications), Article 91 (Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer; 2 specifications), Article 92 (Failure to obey...
USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1301472

Original file (MD1301472.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. Regulations limit the NDRB’s review solely to a determination of the propriety and the equity of a discharge.Issue 2: (Decisional) (Propriety/Equity) RELIEF NOT WARRANTED. ” 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00992

Original file (ND04-00992.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. In the acknowledgement letter, the Applicant was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing, also advised that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) does not travel, and that all hearings are held in the Washington National Capital Region. The names, and votes of the members of the Board...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001042

Similar Decisions