Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100524

Original file (ND1100524.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-SR, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20101222

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)        20040930 - 20041026     Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20041027     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20061003      Highest Rank/Rate: SA
Length of Service: Y ear( s ) M onth( s ) 07 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 35
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 2.0 ( 2 )      Behavior: 1.5 ( 2 )        OTA: 1.84

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):

NJP :

- 20050719 :      Article (UA, 2 specifications )
         Specification 1: 20050415-20050514, 29 days
         Specification 2: Failure to go to appointed place of duty
         Article Missing movement
         Art icle (Failure to obey lawful general order or regulation , 2 specifications )
         Specification 1: Underage drinking
         Specification 2: Dereliction of duty
         Awarded: Suspended:

S CM :    CC:

SPCM:

- 20060906 :       Art icle 81 (Conspiracy)
         Art icle (UA, 2 specifications )
         Specification 1: 20060521-20060617, 28 days
         Specification 2: 20060315-20060405, 22 days
         Art icle (Missing movement)
         Art icle (Failure to obey a lawful order)
         Art icle (False official statement)
         Article 112a (Drugs - marijuana)
         Art icle (Larceny, 2 specifications )
         Specification 1: Steal property of another service member of a value of more than $500.00
         Specification 2: Steal property of another service member of some value
         Article 134 (Breaking restriction)
         Sentence : 6 MONTHS

Retention Warning Counseling :

- 20050706 :       For your personality disorder, not otherwise specified.

- 20050719 :       For two specifications of unauthorized absence/failure to go to appointed place of duty, missing movement, and failure to obey lawful general regulation/dereliction of duty.

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

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

         “ 04 OCT 27 ”

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 11, effective 26 April 2005 until 19 May 2008, 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.        The Applicant desires to re-enlist in the military.
2.       The Applicant contends family problems, youth , and immaturity mitigate his misconduct.

Decision

Date : 2012 0223             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) warnings, for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article ( , ), Article ( , ), and Article (Failure to obey an order or regulation, ) , and for of the UCMJ: Article 81 (Conspiracy, ) , Article ( , , Article ( , ), Article ( , ), Article ( , ), Article ( Wrongful use, possession of a controlled substance, ), Article ( , ), and Article ( Article , : Breaking restriction ) . The Applicant a pre-service drug waiver for using marijuana prior to entering the Navy. Based on the , 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 desires to re-enlist in the military. 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 family problems, youth , and immaturity mitigate his misconduct. The record shows no evidence the Applicant sought appropriate assistance from his chain of command, the chaplain, family services, or even medical providers to deal with family problems. The Applicant provided no evidence to support his issue. The Applicant also contends that his youth and immaturity contributed to making the wrong choice s to engage in numerous serious acts of misconduct . T he record clearly reflects that the Applicant was responsible for his actions when he chose to engage in a pattern of serious misconduct , and should be held accountable. T he record reflects repeated and willful misconduct and that the Applicant had no potential for further service. The NDRB determined the Applicant ’ s youth or age was not a mitigati ng factor in his misconduct. The Applicant is fortunate to have escaped a punitive discharge as part of his sentence at special court-martial. 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 | ND0900102

Original file (ND0900102.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Representation: By a vote of the Characterization shall .By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall MISCONDUCT (SERIOUS OFFENSE).Discussion :The Applicant is requesting his Re Code changed in order to reenlist in the military. 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 Pertinent Regulation/Law A. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document...
USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1400386

Original file (MD1400386.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Appropriate regulations stipulate that separations for misconduct take precedence over potential separations for other reasons.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 | 2008_Marine | MD0801152

Original file (MD0801152.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

There was no evidence in the record, nor was any submitted by the Applicant, documenting he was not responsible for his actions or that the misconduct should be excused based on youth and immaturity. Again, the Board determined an upgrade would be inappropriate.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found Pertinent Regulation/Law A. ” Additional Reviews :...
USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801206

Original file (MD0801206.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request: Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USMCR (DEP)19981028 - 19981231Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 19990101Period of Enlistment: Years MonthsDate of Discharge:20021231Length of Service: Yrs Mths00 DysEducation Level: Age at Enlistment:AFQT: NFIRMOS: 6672Highest Rank: Fitness Reports: Proficiency/Conduct Marks (# of occasions):4.1/3.6 (10)Awards and Decorations (per DD 214): Rifle:...
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900355

Original file (MD0900355.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Board determined the awarded discharge characterization was appropriate and an upgrade wouldbe inappropriate.The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. 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 an upgrade...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801051

Original file (ND0801051.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Board determined clemency was not warranted and an upgrade would be inappropriate.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...
USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801541

Original file (MD0801541.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 post The Board determined based on the limited documentation provided an...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801003

Original file (ND0801003.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Types of Documents Submitted/reviewedRelated to Military Service: DD 214: Service and/or 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 Member of Congress: Other Documentation (Describe) DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801602

Original file (ND0801602.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The command administratively separated the Applicant in lieu of trial by court martial.The Applicant has requested an upgrade to her discharge characterization to “Honorable”. After a thorough review of the applicant’s service record and other evidence; such as:the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record, Discharge Process and additional evidence submitted by the Applicant to the Board, it was determined that relief is warranted. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review,...
NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301122

Original file (ND1301122.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)20000606 - 20000906Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20000907Age at Enlistment:Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20040808Highest Rank/Rate:AALength of Service:Year(s)Month(s) 03 Day(s)Education Level:AFQT: 49EvaluationMarks:Performance:NFIRBehavior:NFIROTA: NFIRAwards and Decorations (per DD 214):NONENJP:SCM: CC:...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100524

Similar Decisions