Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100822

Original file (ND1100822.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-HM3, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20110209

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)        20000531 - 20000720     Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20000721     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years 16 MONTHS Extension
Date of Discharge: 20040409      Highest Rank/Rate: HM3
Length of Service: Y ear s M onth s 19 D a ys
Education Level:        AFQT: 84
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 3.7 ( 3 )      Behavior: 3.3 ( 3 )        OTA: 3.52

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      NDSM

Period of C ONF :

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

C C : 1

- 20040204 :       Offense: Concealment / Price altering of merchandise of a value less than $200
         Sentence : Jail 360 days (Suspended 336 days) Probation 12 months Court Costs $90.00

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

The NDRB note an administrative error on the original DD Form 214:

         “ GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS) ”
         “ MISCONDUCT ”

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 :

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

Applicant’s Issues

1.        The Applicant contends his discharge is inequitable , because his misconduct was an isolated incident with no other adverse actions in three years and eight months of honorable service that included excellent service, a recommendation for officer programs, and graduation with Honors from otolaryngology school .
2.       The Applicant contends youth and immaturity were contributing factors in his misconduct.
3.       The Applicant contends that his discharge was very harsh considering the offense committed and that he did not receive NJP .

Decision

Date: 20 1 2 0328             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 discharge 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 discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety. The Applicant’s record of service included one civilian conviction for c oncealment/ p rice altering of merchandise of a value less than $200. Based on the offenses committed by the Applicant, his command administratively processed him for separation. When notified of administrative separation processing using the notification procedure, the Applicant waived his rights to consult with a qualified counsel and submit a written statement . The Applicant was not entitled to an administrative board.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his discharge is inequitable , because his misconduct was an isolated incident with no other adverse actions in three years and eight months of honorable service that included excellent service, a recommendation for officer programs, and graduation with Honors from otolaryngology school . Despite a servicemember’s prior record of service , certain serious offenses, even though isolated, warrant separation from the Navy to maintain proper order and discipline. Per Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), re-issued October 2002, effective 22 August 2002 until 28 April 2005, Article 1910-144, Separation by Reason of Misconduct - Civilian Conviction, “members may be separated based on civil convictions…when offense would warrant a punitive discharge per Manual for Courts-Martial, Appendix 12 for same or closely related offense.” The Applicant’s civilian conviction equates to violation of UCMJ Article 121 (Larceny), which warrants a Bad Conduct Discharge if adjudicated at Special or General Court-Martial. Violation of Article 121 (Larceny) warrants processing for administrative separation regardless of grade, performance, school honors, recommendations for officer programs, or time in service. This usually results in an unfavorable characterization of discharge (i.e., Under Other Than Honorable Conditions) or, at a maximum, a punitive discharge (i.e., Bad Conduct) and possible confinement if adjudicated and awarded as part of a sentence by a S pecial or G eneral C ourt- M artial. However, his command did not pursue a punitive discharge but opted instead for the more lenient administrative discharge. Relief denied.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends youth and immaturity were contributing factors in his misconduct. The NDRB recognizes that many of our servicemembers are young when they enlist for service , however, most still manage to serve honorably. While some members may be less mature than others, the NDRB 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 that his discharge was very harsh considering the offense committed and that he did not receive NJP . The Applicant was discharged as a result of a civilian conviction equivalent to a violation of UCMJ Article 121 ( Larceny ) . This is a punitive article that carries a maximum punishment of a Bad Conduct Discharge and 6 months confinement if adjudicated at Special or General Court-Martial . A servicemember may be separated based on commission of a serious military or civilian offense when the offense warrants separation and the offense would warrant a punitive discharge. There is no requirement for adjudication by judicial or non-judicial proceedings, but the offense must be substantiated by a preponderance of the evidence (i.e., civilian conviction) . The Applicant should understand his separation was administrative in nature, not punitive. Although his discharge was the result of misconduct, it was not part of the punishment awarded at either a court-martial or NJP. Furthermore, as discussed above, violations of Article 121 could have resulted in punishment substantially more harsh than the discharge the Applicant received. The NDRB determined the awarded characterization of discharge was warranted. 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 his discharge. The Applicant is directed to the Addendum for additional information.

Pertinent Regulation/Law

A. The Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), re-issued October 2002, effective 22 August 2002 until 28 April 2005, Article 1910-144, Separation by Reason of Misconduct - Civilian Conviction.

B. 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 121 .

C . 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 .

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 | 2012_Navy | ND1201116

Original file (ND1201116.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Without post-service documentary evidence, the Board determined the awarded characterization of service shall remain Under Other Than Honorable Conditions.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...
USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801916

Original file (MD0801916.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

However, the Applicant is advised 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 conduct warrants clemency. 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00360

Original file (ND01-00360.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ND01-00360 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010202, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Statement from applicant Copy of DD Form 214 Two pages from applicant's service record PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of...
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101206

Original file (ND1101206.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ):Article(,, 0730 - 0815, 10 October 2008), Article (,, wrongfully using government credit card to obtain cash and merchandise), and Article (Wrongful appropriation, , steal money from property of Bank of America in the amount...
NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700159

Original file (ND0700159.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Board found that Discussion Issues 1 - 3: either which the Board cannot form the basis of relief for the Applicant, or the Board does not have the authority to grant the relief for which the Applicant petitioned. Discharge Process Date Notified: 20051221Reason for Discharge:- Least Favorable Characterization: Date Applicant Responded to Notification:20051221Rights Elected at Notification: Consult with Counsel Obtain Copies of Documents Submit Statement(s)...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801130

Original file (ND0801130.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

A review of the service record indicated on 16 August 2007, the Applicant was recommended for expeditious administrative separation for Personality Disorder, Not Otherwise Specified; this is part of his official military record. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years from the date of discharge. Additionally, the NDRB does not have the authority to...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0902137

Original file (ND0902137.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.Wants to reenlist in the military. ” 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. If a former member has been discharged for more than 15 years, has already been granted a personal appearance...
NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600598

Original file (ND0600598.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant’s service was marred by nonjudicial punishment for failing to go to his appointed place of duty due to a prior overindulgence of alcohol, attempting to steal merchandise from a vending machine, and failing to report a fellow Sailor’s theft of, and damage to, an automobile, in violation of Articles 80, 86 and 92 of the UCMJ; an administrative discharge board recommendation for separation with a characterization of service as under other than honorable conditions; his admission...
USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700236

Original file (MD0700236.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Medical and Service Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found that Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214 The NDRB did note administrative error(s) on the original DD Form 214: “JJE2 ” “ COURT MARTIAL”The NDRB will recommend to the Commandant of the Marine Corps that the DD 214 be corrected as appropriate. If a former member has...
USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1300647

Original file (MD1300647.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...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100822

Similar Decisions