Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101293

Original file (ND1101293.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-CSSA, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20110426

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)        20071128 - 20080414     Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20080415     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20090826      Highest Rank/Rate: CSSA
Length of Service: Year(s) Month(s) 12 D ay(s)
Education Level:        AFQT: 40
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 3.0 ( 2 )      Behavior: 2.0 ( 2 )        OTA: 2.67

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP :
- 20090808 :      Article (Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer , 2 specifications )
         Specification 1: Disrespectful in language toward Culinary Specialist Senior Chief Petty Officer
         Specification 2: Disobeyed a lawful order from Culinary Specialist Senior Chief Petty Officer to stay in the S-2 scullery working until he returned, failed to obey order by leaving S-2 Scullery without authorization
         Article (Assault)
         Awarded: Suspended:

S CM :    SPCM:    C C :

Retention Warning Counseling:

- 20090808 :      For violation of UCMJ A rticle 91, Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer , and A rticle 128, A ssault .

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:                  Other Documentation:
                  Additional Statements:
         From Applicant:          From/To Representation:          From/To Congress member:

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

Applicant’s Issues

1.        The Applicant wants his discharge upgraded so he can reenlist in the military.
2.       The Applicant contends his statement was overruled.
3.       The Applicant suggests his record of service warrants consideration for upgrading his discharge to Honorable.
4.       The Applicant states that he does not have any disciplinary action pending, suggesting his post-service conduct warrants consideration for upgrading his discharge.
Decision

Date: 20 1 2 0725             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 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 Applicant’s record of service included NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13) warning and one non-judicial punishment for s o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 91 ( Insubordinate conduct toward a petty officer, 2 specifications) and Article 128 ( Assault, 1 specification). Based on the offenses committed by the Applicant, command administratively processed for separation . When notified of administrative separation processing using the procedure, the Applicant waived rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request an administrative board.

: (Non - decisional ) The Applicant wants his discharge upgraded so he can reenlist in the military. The NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities. Furthermore, since the NDRB has no jurisdiction over reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Navy, Marine Corps, or any other of the Armed Forces, it is not authorized to change a Reentry (RE) code. Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records can make changes to RE codes. Neither a less than fully honorable discharge nor an unfavorable RE code is, in itself, a bar to reenlistment. A request for a waiver can be submitted during the processing of a formal application for reenlistment through a recruiter. Regulations limit the NDRB’s review solely to a determination of the propriety and the equity of a discharge.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applic ant contends his first statement , which he claims was the truth, was overruled. The NDRB reviews the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge individually, on a case-by-case basis. If such a review reveals an impropriety or inequity, relief is in order. Regulations permit relief on equitable grounds if the Applicant’s discharge is inconsistent with standards of discipline of the Naval Service. Based upon available records, nothing indicates that the Applicant’s discharge was in any way inconsistent with the standards of discipline in the United States Navy. Regardless of whether the Applicant believes his statement was the truth, a preponderance of the evidence reviewed supports the conclusion that the Applicant assaulted, disobeyed, and disrespected a senior chief petty officer. Furthermore, the Government enjoys a presumption of regularity in the conduct of its affairs. The Applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence. The Applicant provided no evidence to support his claim. His statement alone was not sufficient to overcome the presumption of regularity. The NDRB concluded that relie f based on this issue was not warranted. Relief denied.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant suggests his record of service , as evidenced by the medals he received, promotion, and school completion, warrants consideration for upgrading his discharge. Despite a service member’s prior record of service, certain serious offenses, even though isolated, warrant separation from the Navy to maintain proper order and discipline. Violation of Article s 91 and 128 are such offenses. Insubordinate conduct and assaulting another service member usually results in an unfavorable characterization of discharge or, at a maximum, a punitive discharge, and possible confinement if adjudicated and awarded as part of a sentence by a special or general court-martial. However, his command did not pursue a punitive discharge but opted instead for the more lenient administrative discharge. Relief denied.

Issue 4 : (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant states that he does not have any disciplinary action pending . From his statement , the NDRB infers that he wants his post-service conduct to be considered when determining whether to upgrade his discharge. The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the re-characterization of a discharge. However, there is no law, or regulation, that provides that 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 exist during the period of enlistment in question. Besides the Applicant’s statement on the DD Form 293 and a letter of college acceptance for Fall 2011 , he failed to provide any documentary evidence on his behalf for post-service consideration. The Applicant could have provided documentation as detailed in the Post-Service Conduct paragraph in the Addendum with the recognition that 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 that the in-service misconduct was an aberration. Without post-service documentary evidence, the Board determined the characterization of service awarded at the time of discharge was equitable . 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 for additional information.

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, Articles 91 and 128.

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), 701 South Courthouse Road, Suite 1001, Arlington, VA 22204-2490 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 | 2014_Navy | ND1400033

Original file (ND1400033.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Representation: 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 governmental affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include...
NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500858

Original file (ND0500858.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable or general (under honorable conditions). I was still discharge.” When that was over I was discharged.”
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800984

Original file (ND0800984.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

He indicated he has been employed at Perec & Associates as a collector since August 2007.The Board applauds the Applicant’s educational pursuit and enlistment into the ANG; however, it was determined the documentation provided by the Applicant did not mitigate the misconduct that resulted in the characterization of discharge 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0902305

Original file (ND0902305.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Based on the Applicant’s record of service, the NDRB determined an upgrade would be inappropriate.Issue 2: (Decisional) () . However, even if the Applicant could have produced additional evidence to support a review based on his post-service conduct, post-service conduct alone does not guarantee an upgrade.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, and medical record entries, and discharge process, the Board found Therefore,...
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100963

Original file (ND1100963.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 does not have the authority to change a narrative reason for separation to one indicating a medical disability or other...
NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201678

Original file (ND1201678.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant seeks an upgrade to qualify for the G.I. 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200310

Original file (ND1200310.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Representation: 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 governmental affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include...
NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1400735

Original file (ND1400735.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends it has been four years since he was discharged.2. ” 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1500364

Original file (ND1500364.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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 violations of the UCMJ, Articles 91, 128, 121, 109, 134. 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 OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS...
NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201902

Original file (ND1201902.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/To Congress member: DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101293

Similar Decisions