Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100238

Original file (ND1100238.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-EMFN, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20101104

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)        20050916 - 20060418     Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20060419     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20081211      Highest Rank/Rate: EM3
Length of Service: Y ear( s ) M onth( s ) 23 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 92
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 3.0 ( 4 )      Behavior: 2.0 ( 4 )        OTA: 2.58

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Pistol

Periods of C ONF :

NJP :
- 20080904 :      Article (Failure to obey other lawful order , hazing , 20080729 )
         Article (Assault consummated by battery , during hazing incident, 20080729 )
         Awarded: (to E-3) Suspended:

- 20081024 :      Article (Failure to obey other lawful order , CVN 73 Inst. 3120.1A of 19980831 , 20080914 )
         Awarded: (to E-3) Suspended:

- 20081107 :      Article (Failing to go at time prescribed to appointed place of duty , restriction muster, 3 specs )
         Awarded : (3 days) Susp ended:

S CM :    SPCM:    C C :

Retention Warning Counseling :
- 20080904 :       For failure to obey other lawful order by wrongfully engaging in acts of hazing and assault consummated by a battery on a Third Class Petty Officer by unlawfully grabbing him and wrestling him to the ground.

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 and 128 .

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

Applicant’s Issues

1. Applicant contends his post-service achievements warrant consideration for a discharge upgrade.

Decision

Date: 20 1 2 02 09 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 chan ge 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 identif ied one d ecisional issue for the Board ’s consideration . T he 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’s record of service included NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13) retention warning for hazing and assault (4 Sep 2008) and for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 86 ( Absence without leave, from restriction muster, 3 specifications ), Article 92 ( Failure to obey other lawful order, 2 specifications: violation of U.S. Navy hazing policy, on 29 Jul 2008 and failure to obey other lawful order, USS George Washington Instruction 3120.1A, on 14 Sep 2008 ), and Article 128 (Assault consummated by battery, unlawfully grabbed and wrestled a Third Class Petty Officer to the ground, 29 Jul 2008 ) . Based on the offenses committed by the Applicant, command administratively processed for separation. When notified of administrative separation processing (for pattern of misconduct and commission of a serious offense) using the procedure on 7 Nov 2008 , the Applicant waived rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request a General Court-Martial Convening Authority review. The Applicant was separated from the Navy on 11 Dec 2008 with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge due to Misconduct (Commission of a Serious Offense) .

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his post-service achievements warrant consideration for a discharge upgrade. The NDRB considers post-service conduct in order to determine if the misconduct committed during active duty was indicative of the Applicant ’ s character or an aberration. 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 . Normally, to permit relief, a procedural impropriety or inequity must have been found to have existed during the period of enlistment in question. The Applicant submitted letters of recommendation and verification of academic achievement as evidence of h is post-service achievements. Unfortunately, he failed to provide adequate documentation to support a post-service conduct review . He could have submitted documentation as specified in the Post-Service Conduct paragraph in the Addendum , however, c ompletion 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. When a Sailor’s service has been honest and faithful, it is appropriate to characterize that as H onorable. A General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge is warranted when the quality of the member’s service has been honest and faithful but significant negative aspects of the member’s conduct or performance of duty outweigh the positive aspects of the member’s service record. The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of service, reflects the Applicant’s willful failure to meet the requirements of conduct expected of Sailors, especially considering his nuclear power occupational specialty, and f alls short of w hat is required for an upgrade in the characterization of service. After careful review of the available evidence, the Board determined the awarded characterization of service shall remain General ( Under Honorable Conditions ) . 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 the administrative separation 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 | 2011_Navy | ND1101702

Original file (ND1101702.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant seeks an upgrade in his RE Code in order to re-enter the Navy as an OS2. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received...
NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000741

Original file (ND1000741.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/ToCongress member: Pertinent Regulation/Law A. DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL...
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901498

Original file (MD0901498.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. 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 COMPLETION OF REQUIRED ACTIVE SERVICE. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted,...
USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1400071

Original file (MD1400071.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 | 2010_Marine | MD1000002

Original file (MD1000002.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The NDRB received a copy of the Applicant’s medical record and found on his Report of Medical History (DD Form 2807-1) dated 29 October 2008, that he marked “Yes” to blocks 17.e. The NDRB determined he was not mistreated or hazed and although the Applicant thinks he performed to the best of his ability, he met the requirements to be administratively separated by reason of misconduct – pattern of misconduct.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900101

Original file (ND0900101.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Board rejects the Applicant’s claim he did not have formal training on hazing as being without merit and insufficient to warrant an upgrade. Issue 4:() .The Applicant contends his post service conduct warrants an upgrade. The Board determined the characterization of service received, “Under Other Than Honorable Conditions”, was an appropriate characterization considering the length of service and the UCMJ violations involved and based on the limited post-service documentation provided...
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101439

Original file (ND1101439.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Based on the offenses committed by the Applicant, his command administratively processed him for separation.When notified of administrative separation processing using the procedure, the Applicant waived his rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request an administrative board. Full relief to Honorable was not granted as the Board determined that the Applicant bore some responsibility for his misconduct.Summary: After a thorough review of the available...
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900776

Original file (MD0900776.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

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: DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901606

Original file (ND0901606.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

” 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 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. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a...
USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1300631

Original file (MD1300631.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant, however, was not taken to a Special Court-Martial but was administratively separated after requesting separation in lieu of trial by court-martial (SILT). The Applicant could have provided additional 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...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100238

Similar Decisions