Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100973

Original file (ND1100973.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-ATAR, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20110302

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)        19931223 - 19940620     Active: 19940621 - 19970403 HON

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 19970404     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20011115      Highest Rank/Rate: AT3
Length of Service: Y ear s M onth s 12 D a ys
Education Level:        AFQT: 39
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 3.3 ( 4 )      Behavior: 3.5 ( 4 )        OTA: 3.46

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      NDSM L o A (2) SSDR (2) AFEM

Period of UA /C ONF : 20001024 - 2001115 (387)

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

SPCM: 1

- 20000811 :       Art icle 121 (Larceny, stole one Kepco power supply unit, one HP Brand Spectrum Analyzer, two boxes of government equipment manuals, two harmonic mixers, and three coaxial c ables, military property, of a value of approximately $39,200.00)
         Sentence : RIR FOP CONF 90 days (20000811 - 20001023, 73 days) BCD

C C : 1

- 20000418 :       Offense: Drawing or exhibiting a deadly weapon
         Sentence : Incarcerated 4 days and credit for time served of 136 days (19991203 - 20000417, 135 days)

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

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

         Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, should read: “ GOOD CONDUCT MEDAL, NATIONAL DEFENSE SERVICE MEDAL, LETTER OF APPRECIATION (2), SEA SERVICE DEPLOYMENT RIBBON (2), ARMED FORCES EXPEDITIONARY MEDAL ”

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. The Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 22, effective 15 December 1998 to 21 August 2002, Article 5815-010, Executing a Dishonorable or Bad Conduct Discharge.

B. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part IV, Para 403m(7)(a), Presumption Concerning Court-Martial Specifications .

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 .

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

Applicant’s Issues

1.        The Applicant seeks an upgrade for employment opportunities.
2.       The Applicant believes his post-service conduct is worthy of consideration.

Decision
Date : 20 1 2 0517             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 discharg e if such change is warranted. 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. With respect to a discharge adjudged by a court-martial case, 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. In response to the Applicant ’ s clemency request, relevant and material facts stated in a court-martial specification are presumed by the NDRB to be established facts. The Applicant ’ s case was considered under the pertinent standards of equity to determine if any factors in this particular case merited clemency. The Applicant’s record of service included one special court-martial for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 121 (Larceny, stole one Kepco power supply unit, one HP Brand Spectrum Analyzer, two boxes of government equipment manuals, two harmonic mixers, and three coaxial cables, military property, of a value of approximately $39,200.00) and one civilian conviction for d rawing or exhibiting a deadly weapon. The Applicant was found guilty at a special court-martial , and following confinement and appellate review, was awa rded a Bad Conduct Discharge.

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant seeks an upgrade for employment opportunities. The NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment opportunities. Regulations limit the NDRB’s review to a determination of the propriety and equity of the discharge.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant requested the NDRB consider post - service conduct as a basis to gain a more thorough understanding of performance and conduct during the period of service under review . The Applicant submitted documentation showing he is a licensed vocational nurse, has earned an Associate’s degree, a Bachelor of Science degree, Master’s of Business Administration, holds a graduate certificate in project management, and is a certified electronic computer technician. While the NDRB found the Applicant’s academic achievements to be notable, his post-service documentation efforts need to be more encompassing. The Applicant could have provided documentation as specified 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 conduct establishes a reason to change the characterization or narrative reason. T he NDRB determined an upgrade would be inappropriate. Clemency not warranted.

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 . 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

USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700453

Original file (MD0700453.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

After a thorough review of the Applicant’s record, issues submitted, and post service accomplishments, the Board determined that clemency was not warranted and that the sentence awarded the Applicant at his court-martial was appropriate for the offense that he committed. 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 Summary...
USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0601161

Original file (MD0601161.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Complete Service Record: YES Complete Medical Record: YESComplete Discharge Package: YESRegarding propriety, the Board found the discharge: PROPER Regarding equity, the Board found the discharge: EQUITABLEIssues 1-2: The Board determined that these Issues are not issues which can form the basis for relief for the Applicant or that the Board did not have the authority to grant the relief for which the Applicant petitioned. NONE Service Record Entries Related to Characterization of Service or...
USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1500965

Original file (MD1500965.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 remain BAD CONDUCT DISCHARGE and the narrative reason for separation shall remain . 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...
USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1200340

Original file (MD1200340.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The administrative board found, by a vote of 3-0, that allegations of misconduct were supported by a preponderance of the evidence and recommended separation with a characterization of service Under Other Than Honorable Conditions. ” 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...
USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1400638

Original file (MD1400638.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 | 2015_Marine | MD1401801

Original file (MD1401801.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant’s service record documents a punitive conviction and punishment, as adjudged by a Special Court-Martial, on 9 May 2011. ” 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 | 2007_Marine | MD0700515

Original file (MD0700515.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

After a thorough review of the Applicant’s record, issues submitted, and post service accomplishments, the Board determined that clemency was not warranted and that the sentence awarded the Applicant at his court-martial was appropriate for the offense that he committed. 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 Summary...
USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1301796

Original file (MD1301796.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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.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...
NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0701043

Original file (ND0701043.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

After a thorough review of the Applicant’s record, issues submitted, the Board determined that discharge awarded the Applicant at his court-martial was appropriate for the offenses he committed. 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 Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USNR (DEP)20000811 - 20000820Active:...
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901781

Original file (MD0901781.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USMCR (DEP)19981230 - 19990103Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 19990104Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: Years MonthsDate of Discharge:20000811Highest Rank:Length of Service: Year(s)Month(s)08 Day(s)Education Level: AFQT:66MOS: 2531Proficiency/Conduct Marks (# of occasions):/Fitness Reports: Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):Rifle...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100973

Similar Decisions