Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101528

Original file (ND1101528.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-DC3, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20110607

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)        20050930 - 20060730     Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20060731     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20100728      Highest Rank/Rate: DC3
Length of Service: Year(s) Month(s) 28 D ay(s)
Education Level:        AFQT: 51
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 3.3 ( 4 )      Behavior: 2.5 ( 4 )        OTA: 3.14

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Pistol

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP:    (Extracted from Evaluation Report and Counseling Record dated 23 July 2010)

- 201004XX :      Article (Failure to obey order or regulation, 2 specifications)
         Article 134 (General Article, 2 specifications)
         Awarded: REST EPD Suspended: (Illegible)

NJP :     S CM :    SPCM:    C C :      Retention Warning Counseling:

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

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

         “ MISCONDUCT (SERIOUS OFFENSE) ”

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:

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 qualify to receive the G.I. Bill.
2 .       The Applicant contends the event that led to his discharge was his first alcohol - related incident and believes the positive aspects of his record of service, as evidenced by his performance evaluations, warrant consideration for an upgrad e .
3 .       The Applicant contends the character of service on his DD Form 214 is misleading and that his reason for discharge was not a serious offense.

Decision

Date: 20 1 2 0809             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. H is service record did contain evidence that he received at least one nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 92 ( Failure to obey order or regulation, 2 specifications) and Article 134 (General Article, 2 specifications) . Based on the offenses committed by the Applicant, command administratively processed for separation. The NDRB did not have the Applicant’s administrative separation package to determine whether the Applicant waived rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request a General Court-Martial Convening Authority review .

: (Non - decisional) The Applicant wants his discharge upgraded so he can qualify to receive the G.I. Bill. There is no requirement, or law, that grants re-characterization solely on the issue of facilitating access to VA benefits. T he NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing educational opportunities. Regulations limit the NDRB’s review solely to a determination of the propriety and the equity of a discharge. Therefore, this issue does not serve to provide a foundation upon which the NDRB can grant relief.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends the event that led to his discharge was his first alcohol - related incident and believes the positive aspects of his record of service, as evidenced by his performance evaluations, warrant consideration for upgrading his discharge. Despite the positive aspects of a service member’s record of service, certain serious offenses, regardless of whether it was the first offense , warrant separation from the Navy to maintain proper order and discipline. Violation of Article 92 of the UCMJ is such an offense. Failure to obey an order or regulation can 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 special or general court-martial. At NJP proceedings, the Applicant was found guilty of violating Article 92 of the UCMJ. His command did not pursue a punitive discharge but opted instead for the more lenient administrative discharge. Relief denied.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends the character of service on his DD Form 214 is misleading and that his reason for discharge was not a serious offense . 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. A review of available documentation supports the conclusion that the Applicant violated Article 92 of the UCMJ , which sufficiently justifies separation with a characterization of General (Under Honorable Conditions) . Furthermore, because any violation of Article 92 carries a maximum punishment of a punitive discharge and possible confinement for up to six months if adjudicated and awarded as part of a sentence by a special or general court-martial , it is considered a serious offense per the Manual for Courts-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 for additional information.

Pertinent Regulation/Law

A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 29, effective 10 November 2009 until 17 August 2011, 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 92 .

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 | 2015_Navy | ND1500412

Original file (ND1500412.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. 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 and the narrative reason for separation shall remain MISCONDUCT. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review...
NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301320

Original file (ND1301320.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...
NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0601039

Original file (ND0601039.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Elements of Discharge: [INVOLUNTARY] Discharge Process: Date Notified:19940815Reason for Discharge MISCONDUCT - Least Favorable Characterization: Date Applicant Responded to Notification: 19940815Rights Elected at Notification:Consult with Counsel Administrative Board Obtain Copies Submit Statement(s) (date)Recommendation of Commanding Officer (date): 19940826 Discharge directed by (date):BUPERS 19940915Narrative reason directed:Characterization directed: Date Applicant Discharged: 19940918...
NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200315

Original file (ND1200315.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: DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD...
NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301616

Original file (ND1301616.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 | 2010_Navy | ND1000516

Original file (ND1000516.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 (AWOL). ” 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700891

Original file (ND0700891.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The record factually supports the reason for discharge, supports the procedural correctness of discharge, and supports the decision of the Separation Authority that discharge was warranted.4 ().There is no law or regulation which 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. After a complete review of the entire record, including the evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board...
NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1401088

Original file (ND1401088.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...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900149

Original file (ND0900149.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant could have produced additional evidence as stated in the above paragraph with the full understanding completion of these items alone does not guarantee an upgrade.Should the Applicant feel his post service conduct becomes substantial enough to warrant a personal appearance, there are organizations, such as the American Legion, willing to provide guidance to assist former service members in their efforts to obtain a discharge upgrade. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900757

Original file (ND0900757.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request: Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USNR (DEP) 19971231 - 19980114 Active: 19980115-20020113 Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20020114Age at Enlistment: 23Period of Enlistment: Years Extension Date of Discharge: 20040702Highest Rank/Rate: DC3Length of Service: Year(s) Month(s) 19 Day(s) Education Level: AFQT: 35Evaluation Marks: Performance: 3.00 (4) Behavior: 2.25 (4) OTA: 2.68Awards and...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101528

Similar Decisions