Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200894

Original file (ND1200894.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-LTJG, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20120313

Characterization of Service Received:

Narrative Reason for Discharge:
Authority for Discharge: SECNAVINST 1920.6C

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

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive:         US N R (DEP)        20040427 - 20070628     Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Appointment : 20070629     Age: 22
Years Contracted : Indefinite
Date of Discharge: 20100226       Highest Rank : LTJG
Length of Service: 02 Year(s) 07 Month(s) 08 D ay(s)
Education Level:         AFQT: NFIR
Officer’s Fitness reports: Available

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle Pistol

Periods of C ONF :

NJP :

- 20090607 :      Article 116 (Riot or breach of peace, by engaging in a fist fight with a Croatian local national)
         Article 133 (Conduct unbecoming an officer and gentleman, 2 specifications )
         Specification 1: By yelling loudly, “I punched him real hard . I got clocked out of nowhere. ” or words to that effect, to the disgrace of the Armed Forces.
         Specification 2: While crossing the Quarterdeck say to the Officer of the Deck, “I was struck in the face and I destroyed that nigger” or words to that effect, to the disgrace of the Armed Forces.
         Article (Disorderly conduct, drunkenness, 2 specifications)
         Specification 1: Behave in a disorderly manner by being dragged from an altercation with local nationals by shore patrol.
         Specification 2: Behave in a disorderly manner by failing to stop yelling and then kicking and breaking two glass bottles.
         Awarded: Punitive letter of censure Suspended:

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 :

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

Applicant’s Issues

1.        The Applicant contends his discharge is improper and inequitable , because the guidelines for separation for cause established by SECNAVINST 1920.6C were not followed.
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 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 Applicant’s record of service included for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 116 (Riot or breach of peace, by engaging in a fist fight with a Croatian local national) , Article 133 (Conduct unbecoming an officer and gentleman, 2 specifications ) , and Article (Disorderly conduct, drunkenness , 2 specifications). Based on the offenses committed by the Applicant, command administratively processed for separation. The NDRB did not have the Applicant’s complete administrative separation package to determine whether or not the Applicant waived rights to co nsult with a qualified counsel and request an administrative board . However, the Applicant did submit a rebuttal to his notification of administrative separation processing to Commander, Navy Personnel Command.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his discharge is improper and inequitable , because the guidelines for separation for cause established by SECNAVINST 1920.6C were not followed. The Applicant believes that his separation should have been based on the criteria fo r “Substandard Performance of Duty” vice “Misconduct, or Moral, or Professional Dereliction” as per enclosure 3 of SECNAVINST 1920.6C . The Applicant contends that his isolated incident does not meet the criteria for “ Misconduct, or Moral, or Professional Dereliction.” In reviewing discharges, the NDRB 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 that the Applicant’s record of service included significant misconduct that warranted his separation. In addition, the NDRB determined that the Applicant’s contention that the SECNAVINST 1920.6 C guidelines were not followed is without merit . Per SECNAVINST 1920.6C , par. B.1, “ c ommission of a military or civilian offense which could be punished by confinement of 6 months or more” is reason to separate for cause . The Applicant was found guilty at NJP for violations of UCMJ Article 116 and Article 133, both of which could be punished by confinement of 6 months or more and meet the definition and criteria for separation for cause due to “Misconduct, or Moral, or Professional Dereliction.” Relief denied.

Issue 2: (Decisional) (Equity) RELIEF NOT WARRANTED. The Applicant contends his post-service conduct warrants consideration for an upgrade. 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 personal statement and four character references. 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. To warrant an upgrade, the Applicant’s post-service efforts need to be more encompassing. T he Board determined that 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.

Pertinent Regulation/Law

A. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 1920.6C (ADMINISTRATIVE SEPARATION OF OFFICERS), effective 15 December 2005 until Present, establishes policies, standards and procedures for the administrative separation of Navy and Marine Corps officers from the naval service in accordance with Title 10, United States Code and DoD Directive 1332.30 of 14 March 1997.

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 .

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 | 2012_Navy | ND1201130

Original file (ND1201130.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...
NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001478

Original file (ND1001478.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant’s record of service did include one non-judicial punishment for violations of the UCMJ: Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation, 1 specification) and Article 133 (Conduct unbecoming an officer, 1 specification).Based on the offenses committed by the Applicant, her command administratively processed her for separation.The NDRB did not have the Applicant’s administrative separation package to determine whether the Applicant waived rights to consult with a qualified...
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:-...
NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1500362

Original file (ND1500362.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. DEPARTMENT OF THE...
USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1400149

Original file (MD1400149.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

There is no evidence in the Applicant’s record, nor did he provide evidence to the NDRB, that the Applicant sought medical or psychiatric help for PTSD symptoms in the years between his Iraq deployment in 2003 and his misconduct on 1 March 2012. 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...
USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1200470

Original file (MD1200470.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 | MD1301515

Original file (MD1301515.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: DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD...
USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1002026

Original file (MD1002026.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Secretary of the Navy Instruction 1920.6C (ADMINISTRATIVE SEPARATION OF OFFICERS) effective 15 December 2005 until Present establishes policies, standards and procedures for the administrative separation of Navy and Marine Corps officers from the naval service in accordance with Title 10, United States Code and DoD Directive 1332.30 of 14 March 1997. Representation: By a vote of the Characterization shall .By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall UNACCEPTABLE CONDUCT.Discussion The NDRB,...
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0902093

Original file (MD0902093.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Secretary of the Navy Instruction 1920.6C (ADMINISTRATIVE SEPARATION OF OFFICERS) effective 15 December 2005 until Present establishes policies, standards and procedures for the administrative separation of Navy and Marine Corps officers from the naval service in accordance with Title 10, United States Code and DoD Directive 1332.30 of 14 Mar 97. The Applicant contends he was denied due process before he was issued a stigma-holding discharge and wants a non-stigma-holding separation...
NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1401075

Original file (ND1401075.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Secretary of the Navy Instruction 1920.6C (ADMINISTRATIVE SEPARATION OF OFFICERS), effective 15 December 2005 until Present, establishes policies, standards and procedures for the administrative separation of Navy and Marine Corps officers from the naval service in accordance with Title 10, United States Code and DoD Directive 1332.30 of 14 March 1997.B. DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200894

Similar Decisions