Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200236

Original file (ND1200236.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-EOCR, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20111108

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)        20090508 - 20091207     Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20091208     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20110407      Highest Rank/Rate: EOCN
Length of Service: Year(s) Month(s) 00 D ay(s)
Education Level:        AFQT: 40
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 3.0 ( 4 )      Behavior: 1.5 ( 4 )        OTA: 2.33

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Pistol

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP :

- 20101201 :      Article (Failure to obey order or regulation by wrongfully having an unduly familiar relationship with CM2)
         Awarded: Suspended: FOR 23 DAYS FOR 1 MONTH Suspension vacated 20110216

- 20110216 :      Article (Drunken or reckless operation of vehicle, aircraft, or vessel)
         Article (General A rticle - underage drinking)
         Awarded: Suspended:

S CM :    SPCM:    C C :

Retention Warning Counseling:

- 20101202 :      Details NFIR. [Date extracted from Commanding Officer’s letter dated 20110323.]

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

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

         “ 01 04 00 ”

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 seeks medical benefits from the VA.
2 .       The Applicant contends her discharge was inequitable , because, at the time of the incident in November 2010, she was not aware of all the regulations of the Navy’s policy on fraternization.
3 .       The Applicant contends her record of service warrants consideration for an upgrade.

Decision

Date: 20 1 2 1206             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 non-judicial punishments for violations o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 92 ( Failure to obey order or regulation, 1 specification) , Article 111 ( Drunken or reckless operation of a vehicle, 1 specification), and Article 134 ( General Article - Underage drinking, 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 r equest an administrative board.

Issue 1: (Nondecisional) The Applicant seeks medical benefits from the VA. 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. The NDRB is only authorized to review the propriety and equity of a discharge.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends her discharge was inequitable , because, at the time of the incident in November 2010, she was not fully aware of the Navy’s policy on fraternization. The Applicant was not discharged just for engag ing in an unduly famil i ar relationship. She was discharged for a pattern of misconduct. 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. Starting at recruit training, the Navy provides extensive training on fraternization. The NDRB found no improprieties in her command finding her guilty of fraternization at NJP and did not find merit in her claim of being unaware of the Navy’s fraternization policy. A preponderance of the evidence reviewed supports the conclusion that the Applicant did have a pattern of misconduct , which included violations of Articles 92, 111, and 134 of the UCMJ . Such violations would normally 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. Her command did not pursue a punitive discharge but opted instead for the more lenient administrative discharge. The NDRB concluded her discharge was equitable and that relief based on this issue was not warranted. Relief denied.

Issue 3 : (Decisional) (Equity) RELIEF NOT WARRANTED. The Applicant contends her record of service warrants consideration for an upgrade. Despite a servicemember’s prior record of service, certain serious offenses warrant separation from the to maintain proper order and discipline. Violation of Articles 92 and 111 are two such offenses that warrant processing for administrative separation regardless of grade, performance, or time in service. The Applicant was retained in service after her first NJP in December 2010 and was given a retention warning that further misconduct could result in her

discharge from the Navy. After a second NJP in February 2011, her command decided to process her for administrative separation. Because of the serious nature of her offenses, her discharge result ed in an unfavorable characterization of service . The NDRB found the characterization of the Applicant’s discharge was equitable and consistent with the characterization of discharge given others in similar circumstances. 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 | 2015_Marine | MD1500620

Original file (MD1500620.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 has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities.
USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1400017

Original file (MD1400017.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Full relief to Honorable was not granted because the Applicant was still responsible for her behavior and had a documented pattern of misconduct during her enlistment.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...
USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201581

Original file (MD1201581.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...
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900012

Original file (MD0900012.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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. ” 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. ...
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100870

Original file (ND1100870.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. ” Additional Reviews : After...
NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200554

Original file (ND1200554.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

: (Decisional) () .The Applicant wants her Narrative Reason for Separation changed.The preponderance of the evidence reviewed supports the finding that the Applicant did commit a violation of the UCMJ. The NDRB determined that the assigned Narrative Reason for Separation was proper and that relief based on this issue was not warranted. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application...
USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1000640

Original file (MD1000640.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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 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 6105 counseling warnings and for of the Uniform Code of...
USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1200926

Original file (MD1200926.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...
NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1300829

Original file (ND1300829.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: Pertinent Regulation/Law A. ” Additional Reviews :...
NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301712

Original file (ND1301712.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Summary of ServicePrior Service: Inactive: USN (Nurse Candidate Program) 20040108 - 20050421 Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Appointment: 20050422Age: 20Years Contracted: Indefinite Date of Discharge: 20091031 Highest Rank: LTJGLength of Service: Year(s) Month(s) 10 Day(s) Education Level: AFQT: NFIROfficer’s Fitness reports: AvailableAwards and Decorations (per DD 214):Pistol Periods of UA/CONF: NJP:-...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200236

Similar Decisions