Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100507

Original file (ND1100507.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-MMFN, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20101217

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)        19950123 - 19950409     Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 19950410     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years 42 Extension
Date of Discharge: 19980403      Highest Rank/Rate: MM3
Length of Service : Y ear ( s ) M onth ( s ) 24 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 84
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 2.0 ( 2 )      Behavior: 2.0 ( 2 )        OTA: 2.50

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):

Periods of C ONF :

NJP:

- 19960229 :      Article (UA , 19960220 1hr 20min )
         Article ( Failure to obey an order or regulation, 5 specifications )
         Specification 1: Not completing PHYSICS homework on 19960220
         Specification 2: Not completing MIMO homework on 19960220
         Specification 3: Not completing ETMO homework on 19960220
         Specification 4: F ailure to see physics teacher 2x in a week 19960213 - 19960220
         Specification 5: Sleeping in class
         Awarded: O ral A dmonition CCU 30 days (19960307 - 19960406 30 days ) Suspended:

- 19971211 :      Article (Drugs - Marijuana)
         Awarded: Suspended:

-19971229:       Article 86 (UA , fail to go to place of duty , 3 specifications )
         Specification 1: Failure to go to restriction muster 19971213
         Specification 2: Failure to go to restriction muster 19971214
         Specification 3: Failure to go to restriction muster 19971220
         Awarded: BW Suspended: NONE

SCM:     SPCM:    C C :

Retention Warning Counseling :



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 . The Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 18, effective 12 December 1997 until
19 May 1999, Article 1910-146, SEPARATION BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT - DRUG ABUSE.

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.        The Applicant seeks a n upgrade in order to reenlist into the Armed Forces.
2.       The Applicant faults youth and immaturity for his misconduct.
3.       The Applicant contends his mental illness , undiagnosed during service , led to his misconduct.

Decision

Date: 2012 0130             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 Board did complete a thorough review of the circumstances that led to discharge and the discharge process to ensure the pertinent standards of equity and propriety were met. The Applicant’s record of service included for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article ( , ), Article ( , ), and Article ( , , drugs - marijuana ) . The Applicant a pre-service drug waiver for using marijuana prior to entering the Navy. Based on the offenses committed by the Applicant, command administratively processed for separation. Based on the Article 112a violation, processing for administrative separation is mandatory. 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.

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant seeks a n upgrade in order to reenlist into the Armed Forces. 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 B oard for Correction of Naval Records 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.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his misconduct was due to his youth and immaturity. The NDRB recognizes that many service members are young when they enlist for service , but most still manage to serve honorably. The Board does understand some members are not as mature or others , however, it does not view a member’s claim of youth and immaturity to be a mitigating factor or a sufficient reason for misconduct. The NDRB determined the awarded discharge characterization was warranted. Relief denied.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his discharge is inequitable, because it was based on behavior that is symptomatic of mental illness that was undiagnosed during service and believes that it was unfair to penalize him for something that was out of his control. On 18 June 20 1 0, the Applicant was diagnosed with a mental d isorder. However, d ocumentation provided by the Applicant did not indicate that, while in service, he had the mental illness. This diagnosis, nonetheless , does not mean that the Applicant had no control over his behavior, and it certainly does not excuse the multiple instances of serious misconduct carried out by the Applicant. There is nothing in the Applicant’s medical or service records that indicate that he was either not responsible for his actions or should not be held accountable for his misconduct. Vio lation of UCMJ Articles 92 and 112a are considered serious offenses that warrant a punitive discharge after adjudication at a court-martial. The Applicant’s command, however, decided to take the more lenient route by administratively discharging him with a n Under Other Than Honorable Conditions characterization of service. 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 | 2009_Navy | ND0900347

Original file (ND0900347.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: Related to Post-Service Period (cont): Additional Statements: From Applicant: From Representation:From Congress member: Other Documentation: Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214...
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901523

Original file (MD0901523.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall COURT-MARTIAL.Discussion In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of Government affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant. 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0601096

Original file (ND0601096.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

No indication of appeal in the record.19921001: NJP for violation(s) of UCMJ: Article 86: (6 specifications): Between 19920921 – 19920923 and 19921001, fail to go on 6 occasions.Article 92: Dereliction in duty, wrongfully sleeping in classAward: Forfeiture of $100.00 for 1 month, restriction and extra duty for 14 days. Elements of Discharge: [INVOLUNTARY] Discharge Process: ADMINISTRATIVE BOARD PROCEDUREDate Notified:19921204Reason for Discharge:MISCONDUCT - MISCONDUCT - Least Favorable...
NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200827

Original file (ND1200827.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends his discharge was based on minor infractions and was not a Pattern of Misconduct. Based on the offenses committed by the Applicant, command administratively processed for separation. ” 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000951

Original file (ND1000951.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.
USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1100249

Original file (MD1100249.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’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 | 2015_Navy | ND1401684

Original file (ND1401684.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 remain UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL) and the narrative reason for separation shall remain MISCONDUCT. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has...
NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201074

Original file (ND1201074.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 equitableat the time of discharge. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided...
NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000482

Original file (ND1000482.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Decisional issues: (Clemency) The Applicant seeks clemency in the form of an upgrade in the characterization of his service at discharge to General (Under Honorable Conditions) due to extenuating and mitigating facts of his case. Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, the verbatim transcript record of trial by Special Court-Martial, and the discharge process, the Board found that Therefore, the awarded...
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,...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100507

Similar Decisions