Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100230

Original file (ND1100230.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-HM2, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20101102

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)        20010629 - 20011028     Active:          20011029 - 20050606

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20050607     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20090503      Highest Rank/Rate: HM2
Length of Service: Y ear( s ) M onth( s ) 27 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 54
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 4.3 ( 4 )      Behavior: 2.8 ( 4 )        OTA: 3.71

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      (2) LoC MUC (2) ESWS EAWS

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP :

- 20081002 :      Article (Failure to obey order or regulation, 2 specifications )
         Specification 1: Wrongfully substituting her urine on 1443, 20080812
         Specification 2: Wrongfully substituting her urine on 1509, 20080812
         Article (False official statement, 2 specifications )
         Awarded: Suspended: Suspension vacated - date NFIR

- 20090130 :      Article (Check, worthless by dishonorably failing to maintain funds, 4 specifications )
         Specification 1: Check in the amount of $150.00 on 20081220
         Specification 2: Check in the amount of $150.00 on 20081219
         Specification 3: Check in the amount of $150.00 on 20081215
         Specification 4: Check in the amount of $150.00 on 20081219
         Awarded : Susp ended:

S CM :    SPCM:    C C :

Retention Warning Counseling :

- 20081002 :       For failure to obey a lawful general order and false official statements.

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

The NDRB did note administrative error(s) on the original DD Form 214:

         “ CONTINUOUS HONORABLE ACTIVE SERVICE FROM 011029 UNTIL 050606 ”
         “ GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS) ”
         “ 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 23, effective 12 June 2008 until 9 November 2009, 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, 107 , and 134 .

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

Applicant’s Issues

1.        The Applicant desires to receive separation pay.
2.       The Applicant contends she was falsely accused of misconduct.

Decision

Date : 2012 0126             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 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 NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13) warning and for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article (Failure to obey an order or regulation, ), Article ( , ), and Article ( Article , : Checks with insufficient funds ). Based on the offenses committed by the Applicant, command administratively processed for separation . When notified of administrative separation processing using the procedure, the Applicant rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request an administrative board. On 7 April 2009 , the Applicant requested to receive a General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization in lieu of an administrative board. This request was approved on 24 April 2009, and the Applicant was separated with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization.

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant desires to receive separation pay. The NDRB does not have the authority to grant the Applicant’s request. This issue does not serve to provide a foundation upon which the Board can grant relief. The NDRB can only is only authorized to review the propriety and equity of a discharge. The Applicant may petition the Board for Correction of Naval Records, 701 South Courthouse Road, Suite 1001, Arlington, VA 22204-2490 for further review using DD Form 149. Their website can be found at http://www.donhq.navy.mil/bcnr/bcnr.htm .

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends she was falsely accused of misconduct. The Applicant submitted a statement and several in - service documents but no documentation or evidence that supported her contention. There is no evidence in the record to suggest any impropriety or inequity in her separation proceedings. The Applicant’s offenses could have resulted in confinement and a punitive discharge if adjudicated at special court-martial. The Applicant’s command was unusually lenient in pursuing administrative discharge and in approving her request to receive a General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization. In light of the serious nature of the 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

USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0902123

Original file (MD0902123.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. The Applicant served for 2 years, 3 months, 17 days and had four NJPs during that time.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...
NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0601140

Original file (ND0601140.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Medical Record Entries Related to Characterization of Service or Narrative Reason for Separation NONE Elements of Discharge: [INVOLUNTARY] Discharge Process: Date Notified:19920522Reason for Discharge due to: Least Favorable Characterization: Record Supports Narrative Reason: Date Applicant Responded to Notification: 19920524Rights Elected at Notification:Consult with Counsel Administrative Board Obtain Copies Submit Statement(s) (date)GCMCA Review Recommendation of Commanding Officer...
USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1100173

Original file (MD1100173.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Court of Appeals Review - Decision dated 30 October 2006; the finding as to the Additional Charge I and its sole specification (Article 80 - Attempts) is set aside. After a thorough review of the Applicant’s record and the issues as submitted, the NDRB determined that clemency was not warranted and that the sentence awarded the Applicant at her court-martial was appropriate.Accordingly, clemency, as requested, is denied. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted,...
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100452

Original file (ND1100452.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. Relief granted.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entriesand discharge process, the Board found the discharge was proper and equitable at the time of the discharge. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing,...
USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1401204

Original file (MD1401204.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant’s record of service included 6105 counseling warnings, and for of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 90 (Assaulting or willfully disobeying superior commissioned officer, 1 specification), Article 92 (Failure to obey an order or regulation; 3 specifications), Article 107(False Official Statement, 2 specifications), and Article 121 (Larceny, 1 specification). Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of...
NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201142

Original file (ND1201142.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The criteria used by the VA in determining whether a former servicemember is eligible for benefits are different than that used by the Navy when determining a member’s discharge characterization.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. Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801701

Original file (ND0801701.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: Substance Abuse: Criminal Records: Family/Personal Status: Community Service: References: Additional Statements: From Applicant: From Representation:From Congress member: Other Documentation:Applicant Testified: Applicant Available for Questions: Witnesses: Observers: Pertinent...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0902223

Original file (ND0902223.rtf) Auto-classification: 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 eligible for a...
USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1200455

Original file (MD1200455.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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. 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100317

Original file (ND1100317.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. 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...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100230

Similar Decisions