Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1102169

Original file (ND1102169.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-BM3, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20110921

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)        19990921 - 20000730     Active:          20000731 - 20040128

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20040129     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20040924      Highest Rank/Rate: BM3
Length of Service: Y ear( s ) M onth( s ) 2 6 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 70
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 3.0 ( 1 )      Behavior: 1.0 ( 1 )        OTA: 2.14

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      ESWS

T ime Lost per DD214 : 20040512 - 20040513, 1 day; 20040809 - 20040916, 39 days

NJP :

- 20040528 :      Article (Absence without leave, 20040510 - 20040511, 1 day)
         Awarded: Suspended:

S CM :    SPCM:    CC:

CIVIL ARREST:

- 20040809 :       Charges: Details not found in record, dat a found on NAVPERS FORM 1070/606

Retention Warning Counseling :

- 20040523 :       For civilian conviction

- 20040528 :       For violation of UMCJ, A rticle 86 , A bsence without leave

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

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

         “ 04 01 25 ”
         “ CONTINUOUS HONORABLE ACTIVE SERVICE FROM 000731 UNTIL 040128 ”

“ ”

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. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), re-issued October 2002, effective 22 August 2002 until 25 April 2005, 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 .

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

Applicant’s Issues

1.        The Applicant seeks to reenlist into the Armed Forces.
2.       The Applicant contends his record of service outweighs his misconduct.
3.       The Applicant believes his post-service conduct is worthy of consideration.

Decision

Date: 20 1 2 1011             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 discharg e 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 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, for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 86 ( Absence without leave, 20040510-20040511, 1 day), and civilian conviction on 9 August 2004 . Documentation found in the Applicant’s service record indicates he was detained by N orfolk City Police . Based on the offenses committed by the Applicant, his command administratively processed him for separation. The NDRB did not have the Applicant’s complete administrative separation package to determine whether or not the Applicant waived his rights to consult with a qualified counsel and submit a written statement. However, the Applicant has a n HKQ separation code on his DD Form 214 , which indicates he wa ived his right t o an administrative board.

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant seeks to reenlist into the Armed Forces. 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 B oard for Correction of Naval Records 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.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant state s he worked hard to be the best in his field and to be an asset to the Navy , suggesting his record of service warrants an upgrade. Based on the Appli cant’s record of service, the NDRB determined the Applicant engaged in conduct involving one or more acts or omissions that constituted a significant departure from the conduct expected of members of the Naval Service, and the awarded characterization of service was warranted. Relief denied.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant stated he has exercised discipline, diligence , and commitment to education, recovery, and rehabilitation since 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 a substance abuse certificate of completion, veteran’s support group certificate, anger management certificate of completion, criminal thinking certificate of completion, vocational course certificate of completion, three character reference letters, and a job performance review. 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. The Board determined the documentation submitted by the Applicant does not demonstrate if in-service misconduct was an aberration. The characterization of service received was appropriate considering the length of service and UCMJ violations. 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 | 2009_Marine | MD0900399

Original file (MD0900399.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall MISCONDUCT.Discussion :().The Applicant contends he is entitled to a discharge upgrade because he was not sentenced to discharge at his Summary Court-Martial.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. The NDRB determined a discharge upgrade would be inappropriate.The NDRB is authorized...
NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1400837

Original file (ND1400837.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)20010224 - 20010228Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20010301Age at Enlistment:Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20040511Highest Rank/Rate:EACNLength of Service:Year(s)Month(s) 11 Day(s)Education Level:AFQT: 32EvaluationMarks:Performance:3.5(2)Behavior:3.5(2)OTA: 3.5Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):(2) Periods...
USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201656

Original file (MD1201656.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 hearing for 15 years from the date of...
USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1500426

Original file (MD1500426.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant’s record of service included 6105 counseling warnings; for of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 86 (Absence without leave), Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation; 2 specifications), and Article 107 (False official statements); and for of the UCMJ: Article 86 (Absence without leave; 3 specifications), Article 91 (Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer; 2 specifications), Article 92 (Failure to obey...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800549

Original file (ND0800549.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Types of Documents SubmittedRelated to Military Service: DD 214: Service and/or 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 Representation: From Member of Congress: Other Documentation (Describe) The NDRB did note administrative error(s) on the original DD Form...
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0902029

Original file (MD0902029.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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 previous in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member’s overall character.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, and discharge...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900368

Original file (ND0900368.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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 previous in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member’s overall character.The evidence of record reflects the Applicant did not provide any documentation of post-service conduct for the Board’s consideration. The...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801362

Original file (ND0801362.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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 conduct mitigates the reason for the characterization of discharge.The Applicant provided a personal statement and as evidence of post-service accomplishments. The Board determined the characterization of service received, “General (Under Honorable Conditions)”, was an...
NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1401517

Original file (ND1401517.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 GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS) and the narrative reason for separation shall remain . ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901672

Original file (ND0901672.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

However, the Board did complete a thorough review of the circumstances which led to his discharge and the discharge process to ensure his discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety.The Applicant’s record of service included one NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13) warning for unsatisfactory participation (Applicant signed on 24 April 2004), but no misconduct that resulted in nonjudicial punishment or court-martial. Regulations limit the NDRB’s review to a determination of the...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1102169

Similar Decisions