Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200262

Original file (ND1200262.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-AEAA, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20111115

Characterization of Service Received:

Narrative Reason for Discharge:
Authority for Discharge: MILPERSMAN

Applicant’s Request:      Characterization change to:
         Narrative Reason change to:       END OF EAOS

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive:         US N R (DEP)        19990721 - 19990816     Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 19990817     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20030817      Highest Rank/Rate: AE3
Length of Service: Y ear( s ) M onth( s ) 01 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 55
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 3.2 ( 4 )      Behavior: 2.0 ( 4 )        OTA: 2.82

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      (2)

Periods of C ONF :

NJP :

- 20020725 :      Article (Failure to obey order or regulation)
         Awarded : Susp ended:

- 20030307 :      Article (Failure to obey order or regulation)
         Awarded : Susp ended:

- 20030720 :      Article (Absence without leave)
         Article (Failure to obey order or regulation)
         Article 107 (False official statement)
         Awarded: Vacation of suspended RIR of NJP held 20030307 Suspended:

S CM :    SPCM:    C C :

Retention Warning Counseling :

- 20020802 :       For convicted at CO’s NJP on 20020725 of violation of the UCMJ, Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation)

- 20030307 :       For convicted at CO’s NJP on 20030307 of violation of the UCMJ, Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation)

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 1910-140, 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 contends his command treated him unfairly and others would not have received the same punishment.
2.       The Applicant contends he reached his end of obligated service and thus his discharge was improper.

Decision

Date: 20 1 2 1119             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 his discharge and the discharge process to ensure his discharge met the pertinent sta ndards of equity and propriety. The Applicant’s record of service included NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13) warnings and for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 86 ( Absence without leave , 1 specification) , Article 92 ( Failure to obey order regulation, 3 specifications), and Article 107 ( False official statement, 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 and submit a written statement .

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his command treated him unfairly and others would not have received the same punishment. During the Applicant’s enlistment, he received two retention warnings and was found guilty of numerous UCMJ violations at three NJPs. The Applicant provided no documentation or proof that he was treated unfairly by his command. The Applicant’s Commanding Officer provided the following comments on his separation recommendation to the S eparation A uthority, “While his technical proficiency and ability to perform well are evident, he applies these attributes only when he deems it convenient, thus, he is a detriment to good order and discipline. He has received an extraordinary amount of counseling and assistance to correct his deficiencies. Unfortunately , these actions were unsuccessful in that he innately refuses to marry his positive abilities with an attitude that is conducive to a successful tour of active duty. ” After reviewing the Applicant’s record of service, he is fortunate to have only received a General discharge as misconduct of this nature and frequency typically results in an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions characterization of service. The NDRB determined an upgrade was not warranted. Relief denied.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends he reached his end of obligated service and thus his discharge was improper. The Applicant contends he should have received an Honorable discharge since he completed his initial four-year contract and was discharged one day past his obligated service. Characterization of the current enlistment or period of service is determined by conduct, actions, or performance during that enlistment or service plus any extensions prescribed by law or regulations or effected with the consent of the member up to midnight of the date of discharge. The Applicant had one day of unauthorized absence , which accounted for the extra day . The command properly notified the Applicant of separation processing on 20 July 2003 and discharged him on 17 August 2003 within his four-year enlistment. The NDRB determined the administrative separation was proper and equitable. 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 | 2008_Marine | MD0801154

Original file (MD0801154.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 awarded by the Special Court-Martial was an appropriate...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801475

Original file (ND0801475.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The NDRB determined an upgrade to the Applicant’s discharge would be inappropriateAfter 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801393

Original file (ND0801393.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, “Under Other Than Honorable Conditions”, was an...
USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1101547

Original file (MD1101547.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

For reasons undetermined, the Applicant was not processed for administrative separation from the Marine Corps for Misconduct-Drug Abuse, which would normally result in an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge. Therefore, in accordance with the MARCORSEPMAN, the awarded characterization of service shall HONORABLE and the narrative reason for separation shall remain COMPLETION OF REQUIRED ACTIVE SERVICE. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former...
NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001473

Original file (ND1001473.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 | 2008_Marine | MD0800968

Original file (MD0800968.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) DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901301

Original file (ND0901301.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

On page 4, Item 8, in the instructions for completion of DD Form 293, the Applicant is notified to submit evidence "which substantiates or relates directly to your issues in Item 6" (Issues: Why an upgrade or change is requested and justification for the request). Based on the absence of such documentation, the Boarded determined that relief was not warranted.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record Entries, Discharge Process...
NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201720

Original file (ND1201720.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)20040207 - 20041109Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20041110Age at Enlistment:Period of Enlistment: Years19 MONTHSExtensionDate of Discharge:20100311Highest Rank/Rate:MN2Length of Service:Years Months2 DaysEducation Level:AFQT: 55EvaluationMarks:Performance:2.6(7)Behavior:2.3(7)OTA: 2.66Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):Rifle...
NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1401459

Original file (ND1401459.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 MISCONDUCT. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900139

Original file (ND0900139.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant contends his discharge characterization should be upgraded because the charges which served as the basis for his discharge were incorrect and, with the exception of one charge, all of the other civilian charges pending against him were dropped.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 Applicant is advised...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200262

Similar Decisions