Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101595

Original file (ND1101595.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-SA, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20110614

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 - 20060314     Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20060315     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20100512      Highest Rank/Rate: SN
Length of Service: Year(s) Month(s) 28 D ay(s)
Education Level:        AFQT: 43
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 3.5 ( 2 )      Behavior: 1.5 ( 2 )        OTA: 2.86

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP :

- 20060908 :      Article (Larceny and wrongful appropriation )
         Awarded: Suspended: [Extracted from Report and Disposition of Offense(s) dated 20090519.]

- 20090529 :      Article (Check, worthless, making and uttering by dishonorably failing to maintain funds, 7 specifications )
         Specification 1: To Naval Exchange for $179.99 on 20071128
         Specification 2: To Naval Exchange for $404.99 on 20081013
         Specification 3: To Naval Exchange for $177.73 on 20081021
         Specification 4: To Naval Exchange for $187.95 on 20081022
         Specification 5: To Naval Exchange for $247.96 on 20081026
         Specification 6: To Naval Exchange for $828.35 on 20081104
         Specification 7: To Naval Exchange for $888.99 on 20090221
         Awarded: Suspended:

S CM :    SPCM:    C C :

Retention Warning Counseling:

- 20060522 :      For numerous negative entries on your Recruit Personnel Data Record (Hard Card) to include: failure to meet the minimum standard required for language comprehension and verbal communication skills as evidenced by failing two consecutive modules under Fundamental Applied Skills Training (FAST) program, failure to follow instructions, and substandard performance.

- 20090529 :      For violation of Article 134 (Check, worthless, making, and uttering by dishonorably failing to maintain funds).

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

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

         “ SA ”
         “ E2 ”

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 29, effective 10 November 2009 until Present,
Article 1910-140, SEPARATION BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT - PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT.

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 .

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 receive the G.I. Bill.

Decision

Date: 20 1 2 0821 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. T he 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 NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13) warnings and non-judicial punishments for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice: Article 121 ( Larceny and wrongful appropriation, 1 specification) , Article 134 ( General Article/Check, worthless, making and uttering by dishonorably failing to maintain funds , 7 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 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. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing a former service member’s eligibility to receive G.I. Bill benefits. 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.

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

NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0601140

Original file (ND0601140.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Medical Record Entries Related to Characterization of Service or Narrative Reason for Separation NONE Elements of Discharge: [INVOLUNTARY] Discharge Process: Date Notified:19920522Reason for Discharge due to: Least Favorable Characterization: Record Supports Narrative Reason: Date Applicant Responded to Notification: 19920524Rights Elected at Notification:Consult with Counsel Administrative Board Obtain Copies Submit Statement(s) (date)GCMCA Review Recommendation of Commanding Officer...
NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201295

Original file (ND1201295.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant wants an upgrade for better employment opportunities.2. 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800560

Original file (ND0800560.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Board determined an upgrade was not warranted.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 Pertinent Regulation/Law A. ” 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900948

Original file (ND0900948.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

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: Substance Abuse: Criminal Records: Family/Personal Status: Community Service: References: Additional Statements: From Applicant: From/To Representation: From/To Congress member: Other Documentation: DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW...
USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1301750

Original file (MD1301750.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, and record entries, 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 eligible for a...
NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201376

Original file (ND1201376.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

With an NJP for violation of UCMJ Articles 121 and 123a during her enlistment, the Applicant met the requirements for administrative separation processing for Misconduct (Serious Offense) and was equitably assigned a General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization of service.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...
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900596

Original file (MD0900596.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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 Procedures : If you believe that 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...
USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700516

Original file (MD0700516.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Absent any documentation provided by the Applicant for the Board to consider, the Board determined that the Applicant’s service record did notmitigate the misconduct that resulted in the characterization of discharge.An upgrade would be inappropriate.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. After a thorough review of the...
USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1000556

Original file (MD1000556.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...
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900212

Original file (MD0900212.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant is advised that completion of these items alone does not guarantee clemency will be granted, as each discharge is reviewed by the Board on a case by case basis to determine if post service conduct justifies clemency. The Board determined the characterization of service received, “Bad Conduct Discharge”, was an appropriate characterization considering the length of service and the UCMJ violations involved, and based on the lack of post service documentation provided, clemency...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101595

Similar Decisions