Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200697

Original file (ND1200697.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-SHSN, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20120209

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)        20010830 - 20011125     Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20011126     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20040513      Highest Rank/Rate: SN
Length of Service: Y ear( s ) M onth( s ) 18 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 51
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 3.0 ( 1 )      Behavior: 3.0 ( 1 )        OTA: 3.00

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      NONE

Period of UA : 0700, 20030721 - 1405, 20040426

NJP :     S CM :    SPCM:    C C :      Retention Warning Counseling :

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 30 May 2005, Article 1910-106, SEPARATION IN LIEU OF TRIAL BY COURT-MARTIAL.

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 denied him Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) leave while his wife was having their second child, he needed to be on leave to care for his wife and two-year-old daughter, and others were given leave rather than being sent out to sea.

Decision

Date : 20 1 3 0110 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 did not include any 6105 counseling warnings, non-judicial punishments, summary courts-martial, or special courts-martial for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). However, it did reflect a violation of UCMJ Article 86 ( Unauthorized a bsence from 20030721 - 20040426) for which charges were referred to a special court-martial. On 26 April 2004, the Applicant submitted a request for separation in lieu of trial by court-martial. In the request for discharge, he waived his right to consult with counsel but noted that he fully understood the elements of the offense for which he was charged and that he was guilty of the offense. He certified a complete understanding of the negative consequences of his actions and that his characterization of service could be Under Other Than Honorable Conditions. The Convening Authority approved the request for separation and ordered the Applicant discharged Under Other Than Honorable Conditions in lieu of trial by court-martial.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his command denied him FMLA leave while his wife was having their second child, he needed to be on leave to care for his wife and two-year-old daughter, and others were given leave rather than being sent out to sea. The government enjoys a presumption of regularity in the conduct of its affairs. The Applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presen tation of substantial and credible evidence to support his issue. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the Applicant produced viable evidence, to support the contention the command treated him unfairly or denied him leave . The Applicant submitted a Red Cross message from January 2003 surrounding the birth of his second child, but he did not submit any documentation to show that his command denied him leave. Six months later in July 2003 is when the Applicant went UA until April 2004. When he returned from being UA, the Applicant requested separation in lieu of trial by court-martial rather than face a judge to explain his reason for going UA. The NDRB determined there were no mitigating circumstances to his serious misconduct and further determined his discharge was both 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

NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800846

Original file (ND0800846.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request: Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USNR (DEP)20021220 - 20030721Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20030722Period of enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20060331Length of Service: Yrs Mths10 DysEducation Level: Age at Enlistment:AFQT: NFIRHighest Rank/Rate:PR3Evaluation marks:Performance: NFIR Behavior:NFIROTA: NFIRAwards and Decorations (per DD 214):Periods of UA/CONF:...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801097

Original file (ND0801097.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

[Extracted from CO, TRIDENT Refit Facility letter 20050624].NJP:SCM:SPCM:CC:Retention Warning Counseling:NDRB Documentary Review Conducted (date): 20070510 NDRB Documentary Review Docket Number: ND06-00888 NDRB Documentary Review Findings: NO CHANGE WARRANTED 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: Substance Abuse: Criminal...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800638

Original file (ND0800638.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Reenlistment Opportunities Decision Date: 20080501Location: Washington D.C Representation: By a vote of the Characterization shall .By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall MISCONDUCT.Discussion : either which the Board cannot form the basis of relief for the Applicant, or the Board does not have the authority to grant the relief for which the Applicant petitioned. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Service Record Entries,...
NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1400099

Original file (ND1400099.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 | 2014_Marine | MD1401252

Original file (MD1401252.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

” 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. 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. Additionally, the NDRB has no...
USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0601101

Original file (MD0601101.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-PVT, USMCMD06-01101Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request: Application Received: 20060816Narrative Reason for Separation: Character of Service:BAD-CONDUCT DISCHARGEDischarge Authority: MARCORSEPMAN 1105Last Duty Assignment/Command at Discharge: 1STBN 6THNAR 2DMARDIV CAMP LEJEUNE NV Applicant’s Request:Narrative Reason change to: NOT APPLICABLE Characterization change to:GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)Review Requested:Representation: Decision: Date of Decision: 20070628 Location of...
NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1400046

Original file (ND1400046.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

” 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. A request for a waiver can be submitted during the processing of a formal application for reenlistment through a recruiter.
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100008

Original file (ND1100008.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: DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD...
USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1300496

Original file (MD1300496.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

After a complete review of the records and documentation submitted by the Applicant, the NDRB determined PTSD did not mitigate his misconduct, and clemency is not warranted on this issue. ” 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900460

Original file (ND0900460.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.Besides the Applicants statement on the DD Form 293, he provided several character references as evidence on his behalf. After a thorough...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200697

Similar Decisions