Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100082

Original file (ND1100082.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-HN, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20101013

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)        20060630 - 20061213     Active: 20030429 - 20050515 HON

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20061214     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20091204      Highest Rank/Rate: HN
Length of Service : Y ear s M onth s 21 D a ys
Education Level:        AFQT: 36
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 3.6 ( 5 )      Behavior: 2.6 ( 5 )        OTA: 3.02

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      GWOTSM NDSM MUC RIFLE MM

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP : 1
- 20081204 :      Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation)
         Article 95 (Resistance, flight, breach of arrest, and escape, resisting arrest)
         Article 128 (Assault)
         Article 134 (Conduct brin g ing discredit upon the Armed Forces)
         Awarded: RIR FOP EPD Suspended: FOP

S CM : NONE       SPCM: NONE       C C : NONE         Retention Warning Counseling : NONE

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

The NDRB did note administrative errors on the original DD Form 214:

         “ 06 DEC 14 ”
         Block 4c, Net Active Service This Period, should read: “02 11 21 ”

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 29, effective 10 November 2009 until Present, 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 s 92, 95, 128, 134.

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

Applicant’s Issues

1. The Applicant conten ds his discharge is inequitable due to the circumstances surrounding the incident for which he was separated .

Decision

Date : 20 1 2 0119 Location: Washington D.C . R epresentation : 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 discharg e 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. The Applicant’s record of service included one nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation) , Article 95 (Resistance, flight, breach of arrest, and escape, resisting arrest) , Article 128 (Assault) , and Article 134 ( General Article: Conduct brin g ing discredit upon the Armed Forces) . The Applicant was administratively processed for separation after he communicated a threat to another shipmate on 4 November 2009. When notified of administrative separation processing using the notification p rocedure, the Applicant exercised his rights to consult with a qualified counsel and submit a written statement .

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his discharge is inequitable due to the circumstances surrounding the incident for which he was separated. The Applicant submitted no documentation or evidence to support his contention or to overcome the NDRB’s presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs. The record clearly shows the Applicant was found guilty at NJP of several serious offenses , including assault, resisting arrest, and conduct brin g ing discredit upon the A rmed F orces. These offenses warranted confinement and a punitive discharge if adjudicated at special court-martial. The Applicant’s command was lenient in pursuing an administrative separation and particularly in assigning a General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization of service in light of the second incident of misconduct when he threatened another Sailor . Due to the serious nature of the Applicant’s misconduct, an upgrade would be inappropriate. 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, specifically the paragraphs titled Additional Reviews, Automatic Upgrades, 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 | ND1100619

Original file (ND1100619.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends the Navy never gave him an opportunity to go to drug and alcohol rehabilitation treatment.2. 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901704

Original file (ND0901704.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The NDRB determined the Applicant met the requirements for separation by reason of misconduct – pattern of misconduct 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 .The Applicant remains eligible for a personal...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900642

Original file (ND0900642.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...
USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1301471

Original file (MD1301471.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant appeared before an Administrative Separation Board, which determined he committed misconduct and warranted an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions characterization of service. 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200560

Original file (ND1200560.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Summary of ServicePrior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)19971203 - 19980203Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20020621Age at Enlistment:Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20050506Highest Rank/Rate:CS2Length of Service:Years Months16 DaysEducation Level:AFQT: 38EvaluationMarks:Performance:3.3(8)Behavior:2.9(8)OTA: 3.23Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):KCMPeriods of...
NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200997

Original file (ND1200997.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 | 2008_Navy | ND0801340

Original file (ND0801340.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant should be aware 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 mitigates the reason for the characterization of discharge.Besides the personal statement provided on the DD Form-293, the Applicant failed to provide any additional statements and evidence of in-service and post service accomplishments. The Board determined based on...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900579

Original file (ND0900579.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Board determined the awarded discharge was appropriate and an upgrade would be inappropriate.The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. The Board determined the characterization of service received, “General (Under Honorable Conditions)”, 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900955

Original file (ND0900955.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

By a majority vote of 5-0, the Board determined the characterization of service received, “Under Other Than Honorable Conditions, ” and the narrative reason for the discharge; “Commission of a Serious Offense,” shall remain as issued considering the length of service and the UCMJ violations involved.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...
NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001292

Original file (ND1001292.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

: (Non-decisional) The Applicant wants to reenlist in the military. 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...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100082

Similar Decisions