Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101297

Original file (ND1101297.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-BMC, 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)        199 31102 - 19941114     Active: 19941115 - 19970909 HON
                                    USN 19970910 - 20001109 HON
                                    USN 20001110 - 20041021 HON

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20041022     Age at Enlistment: 27
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20071121      Highest Rank/Rate: BMC
Length of Service: Y ear s M onth 00 D ays
Education Level:        AFQT: 32
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 4.0 ( 2 )      Behavior: 3.5 ( 2 )        OTA: NA

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      BATTLE “E” (2) LOC (2) NDSM (2) GCM (3) SSDR (4) GWOTSM NMCAM (4) NATO KCM ( 3 )

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP : 1

- 20070830 :      Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation)
         Article 107 (False official statement )
         Awarded: FOP RESTR LOR Suspended:

S CM : NONE        CC: NONE Retention Warning Counseling: NONE

SPCM: 1

- 20070425 :      Article 92 (Failu re to obey order or regulation , unauthorized use of government travel card )
         Sentence: FINE $500.00 HARD LABOR 30 days

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

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

         “CONTINUOUS HONORABLE ACTIVE SERVICE FROM 19941115 UNTIL 20041021 ”

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

Pertinent Regulation/Law

A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 11, effective 26 April 2005 until 11 June 2008, 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, Article s 92 and 107.

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

Applicant’s Issues

1.       The Applicant wants his Reentry Code ( RE ) code changed so he can reenlist in the military.
2.       The Applicant contends his discharge was based on an isolated incident in 13 years of service.
3.       The Applicant contends he used his government travel card to support his family after his mother’s home was destroyed by Hurricane Katrina .
4.       The Applicant believes his p ost-service conduct warrants consideration for upgrading his discharge.

Decision

Date: 20 1 2 0712             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 Applicant’s record of service included one non - judicial punishment (N J P) for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation) and Article 107 (False official statement) and one S pecial C ourt- M artial for violation of the UCMJ: Article 92 ( Failure to obey order or regulation , unauthorized use of government travel card ). Based on the offenses committed by the Applicant, his command administratively processed him for separation . The NDRB did not have the Applicant’s administrative separation package to determine whether the Applicant waived his rights to consult with a qualified counsel and submit a written statement . The Applicant has an HKQ separation code on his DD Form 214 , which indicates he waived his right to request an administrative board .

: (Non - decisional) The Applicant wants his RE code changed so he can reenlist 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, it is not authorized to change an RE code. 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. Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records can make changes to RE codes. Regulations limit the NDRB’s review solely to a determination of the propriety and the equity of a discharge.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his discharge was based on an isolated incident in 13 years of service. Despite a service member’s prior record of service, certain serious offenses warrant separation from the Navy to maintain proper order and discipline. Violation of Articles 92 and 107 are such offenses that may warrant separation regardless of performance, awards, grade, or time in service. Both a rticles are considered serious offenses per the Manual for Courts-Martial and usually result 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 S pecial or G eneral C ourt- M artial. The Applicant was found guilty of violatin g Article 92 at a S pecial C ourt- M artial. However, he did not receive a punitive discharge. Shortly after the S pecial C ourt- M artial, the Applicant received an NJP for another violation of Article 92 and for violating Article 107 of the UCMJ. He was then administratively discharged. After reading the Applicant’s statement and reviewing the record of service, the NDRB determined that the discharge was proper and equitable and that relief based on this issue is not warranted. Relief denied.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends he used his government travel card to support his family after his mother’s home was destroyed by Hurricane Katrina . There is no evidence in the record, nor did the Applicant provide any evidence , to indicate he attempted to u se the numerous services available for service members who experience family hardships during their enlistment s such as the Navy Relief Society or Red Cross. Instead, in his effort to handle his family crisis, the Applicant chose to use his government travel card in an unauthorized manner. The fact that the

Applicant did not receive a punitive discharge from the Special Court-Martial and , according to the Applicant, was allowed to continue to serve suggest s that the extenuating circumstances were considered during his Special Court-Martial. However, he committed another violation of Article 92 as well as violat ing Article 107 after the S pecial C ourt- M artial in a separate incident . Therefore, t h e NDRB concluded that relief bas ed on this issue is not warranted. Relief denied.

Issue 4: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant believes his post-service conduct, as evidenced by the character reference s he submitted, warrants consideration for upgrading his discharge. The NDRB considers 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. The Applicant provided four character references pertaining to his post-service life. The Applicant could have provided documentation as detailed 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 that the in-service misconduct was an aberration. To warrant an upgrade, the Applicant’s post-service efforts need to be more encompassing. The Board determined that the documentation submitted by the Applicant does not demonstrate if in-service misconduct was an aberration. The characterization of service received was appropriate. 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.

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

USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1002216

Original file (MD1002216.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Time served in confinement: 20030709 - 200300711 [IHCA], 20030712 - 20030827 [pre-trial confinement], and 20030828 - 20030920 [confinement] - 72 days total time served.CC: NONERetention Warning Counseling:NONE 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...
USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1101549

Original file (MD1101549.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Based on the violation of Article 112(a), processing for administrative separation, by service policy, was mandatory.The Applicant was notified - in writing - of the Command’s intent to process the Applicant for administrative separation for Misconduct (Drug Abuse) in accordance with paragraph 6210.5 of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual (MARCORSEPMAN). On 01 March 2004, the Separation Authority approved the request that the Applicant be separated administratively with an...
USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1001963

Original file (MD1001963.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, the record of trial by Special Court-Martial, and the discharge process, the NDRB determined that clemency was not warranted. ” 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...
USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1100829

Original file (MD1100829.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Regulations limit the NDRB’s review solely to a determination of the propriety and the equity of a discharge. As such, the NDRB determined that the evidence of record established the basis for discharge and the actions were proper.Accordingly, relief based on propriety is not warranted. ” 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...
USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1101141

Original file (MD1101141.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. 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 Government affairs unless there is substantial...
USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1300895

Original file (MD1300895.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/ToCongress member: Pertinent Regulation/Law A. Paragraph 6210, MISCONDUCT of...
USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1101546

Original file (MD1101546.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/ToCongress member: Pertinent Regulation/Law A. Paragraph 1105, DISCHARGE...
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101532

Original file (ND1101532.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. 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...
USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1200343

Original file (MD1200343.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant’s record of serviceincluded 6105 counseling retention warning and one Special Court-Martial for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 92 (Failure to obey an order or regulation, 7 specifications: Wrongfully striking numerous recruits with excessive force to correct the position of the recruits, o/o 24 May-26 Jul 2008; wrongfully hazing numerous recruits, ordering recruits to fall from the standing position to their knees onto the cement ground, o/o...
NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001468

Original file (ND1001468.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)19961115 - 19961216Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 19961217Age at Enlistment:Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:19991212Highest Rank/Rate:SRLength of Service: Year(s)Month(s)02 Day(s)Education Level:AFQT: 56EvaluationMarks:Performance:NFIRBehavior:NFIR OTA: NFIRAwards and Decorations (per DD 214):NONE Periods of...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101297

Similar Decisions