Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200306

Original file (ND1200306.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-FA, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20111129

Characterization of Service Received:

Narrative Reason for Discharge:
Authority for Discharge: MILPERSMAN 3630600 [COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE]

Applicant’s Request:      Characterization change to:       HONORABLE OR
         Narrative Reason change to:

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive:         US N R (DEP)        19920923 - 19921208     Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 19921209     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 19970610      Highest Rank/Rate: FA
Length of Service: Year(s) Month(s) 02 D ay(s)
Education Level:        AFQT: 59
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: NFIR         Behavior: NFIR OTA: NFIR

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):

Periods of C ONF : 19940317-19970521 (1 , 162 days I n Hands of Civil Authorities )

NJP :

- 19930701:      Article (Absence without leave, 2 specifications )
         Specification 1: 0730, 19930525 until 0700, 19930602
         Specification 2: 0700, 19930611 until 0730, 19930614
         Awarded: Suspended:

- 19940214 :      Article (Failure to obey order or regulation)
         Awarded: Suspended:

S CM :    SPCM:

C C :

- 19940812 :       Offense: Violation of Japanese Criminal Code, Article 240 (Wounding through robbery) and Article 60 (Co-principal)
         Sentence : Imprisonment at forced labor

Retention Warning Counseling:

- 19940214 :      For violation of UCMJ Article 92 (Failure to obey a lawful order) as evidenced by Captain’s Mast of 14 February 1994.

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

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

         “ ”
         “ MISCONDUCT ”

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 14, effective 3 October 1996 until 12 December 1997, Article 3630605, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL 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 s 92, 122 , and 134 .

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

Applicant’s Issues

1.       The Applicant contends his alcoholism was the underlying cause of his misconduct .
2 .       The Applicant contends his post-service conduct warrants consideration for an upgrade.

Decision

Date: 20 1 2 1220             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 punishment s for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 86 ( Absence without leave, 2 specifications) and Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation, 1 specification). The Applicant also had a civilian conviction for wounding through robbery, for which the UCMJ equivalent would be violations of Article 122 (Robbery) and Article 134 (General Article - Assault, with intent to commit robbery). Based on the offenses committed by the Applicant, command administratively processed for separation. When notified of administrative separation processing using the procedure, the Applicant exercised rights to consult with a qualified counsel . He waived his rights to submit a written statement and request an administrative board .

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his alcoholism was the underlying cause of his misconduct, suggesting that consideration for his disease be given when determining whether to upgrade his discharge. According to the trial transcript found in his service record, the robberies were premeditated and therefore the Applicant is assumed not to have been under the influence of alcohol from the time the robberies were planned until they were committed. In addition to his civilian conviction, the Applicant had two NJPs, suggesting a propensity for misconduct. While the Applicant may believe that his addiction to alcohol was the underlying cause of his misconduct, his record and the trial transcript clearly indicates his misconduct was willful and demonstrates he was unfit for further service. There is also no indication that he was not responsible for his actions or should not be held accountable for his misconduct. The Board determined that relief based on this issue was not warranted. Relief denied.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his post-service conduct warrants consideration for an upgrade. The Applicant provided documentation and a statement regarding his post-service conduct, character, and achievements. 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. To warrant an upgrade, the Applicant’s post-service efforts need to be more encompassing. The Applicant could have provided documentation as detailed in the Post-Service Conduct paragraph in the Addendum , h owever, 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 was not convinced that the documentation submitted by the Applicant demonstrates his in-service misconduct was an aberration and determined that relief based on this issue was not warranted. 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 . Since fifteen years from the date of the Applicant’s discharge have elapsed, he is not eligible for a personal appearance hearing with the NDRB. The Applicant may petition the Board for Correction of Naval Records, 701 South Courthouse Road, Suite 1001, Arlington, VA 22204-2490, for fur ther review using DD Form 149.

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 | 2012_Marine | MD1200093

Original file (MD1200093.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

When notified of administrative separation processing using the procedure, the Applicant waived rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request an administrative board.The Applicant provided additional documentation in the form of a U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)awards letter for the NDRB’s consideration or to rebut the Government’s presumption of regularity that was not already documented in his official military record of service and medical...
NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301165

Original file (ND1301165.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends youth and immaturity were the underlying cause of his misconduct.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...
NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1400502

Original file (ND1400502.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)19970930 - 19971120Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 19971121Age at Enlistment:Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:19991213Highest Rank/Rate:SKSNLength of Service:Year(s)Month(s) 23 Day(s)Education Level:AFQT: Not readableEvaluationMarks:Performance:NFIRBehavior:NFIROTA: NFIRAwards and Decorations (per DD...
USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1500327

Original file (MD1500327.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant’s record of service included 6105 counseling warnings, and for of the UCMJ: Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation; wrongfully consume alcohol under age 21), Article 129 (Burglary; unlawfully broke and entered barracks room of Cpl), and Article 134 (General article; 1 specification of indecent assault). 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...
USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1400588

Original file (MD1400588.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.
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900532

Original file (ND0900532.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...
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101095

Original file (ND1101095.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends his bi-polar disorder was a mitigating factor in his misconduct.2. 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0902501

Original file (ND0902501.rtf) Auto-classification: 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 . ” 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301835

Original file (ND1301835.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 | 2011_Navy | ND1101346

Original file (ND1101346.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

On 23 April 2003, the Applicant’s command submitted a waiver request for retention of the Applicant in the Navy (in lieu of alcohol rehabilitation treatment failure) to the Commander, Navy Personnel Command (PERSCOM). The Applicant’s command requested he be retained in the Navy and given another chance to complete alcohol rehabilitation and continue his enlistment in the Navy. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200306

Similar Decisions