Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201183

Original file (ND1201183.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-RP3, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20120501

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:         USNR (DEP)        19930416 - 19930513     Active:          19930614 - 19950627
         USNR     19950628 - 19990224 HON
         USNR     19990225 - 19990614 HON
         USNR     19990615 - 20010414 HON
         USNR     20030415 - 20030802 HON
         USNR     2003080 3 - 20060414 HON

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20060509     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 200612 12      Highest Rank/Rate: RP3
Length of Service : Y ear ( s ) M onth ( s ) 13 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 49 / 67
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: N/A          Behavior: N/A    OTA: N/A

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

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP:     SCM:     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. The Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 11, effective 29 April 2005 until 1 June 2008,
Article 1910-146, SEPARATION BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT - DRUG ABUSE.

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 is attending seminary school and wants to remove the stigma of an unfavorable discharge .
2.       The Applicant contends his misconduct was an isolated incident in otherwise honorable service and post - service conduct.
3.       NDRB Issue: The Applicant’s discharge was warranted but improperly executed.

Decision

Date : 20 1 3 0221             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. T he 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 no NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13) warnings and no for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) . Based on an Article 112a violation (Wrongful use, possession, etc. of a controlled substance) , processing for administ rative separation is mandatory. When notified of administrative separation processing using the procedure, the Applicant rights to consult with a qualified coun sel, submit a written statement , and request an administrative board . The a dministrative b oard determined by a 3-0 vote that the misconduct was supported by a preponderance of the evidence and recommended an Entry Level Separation. The Applicant’s command concurred with the board’s recommendations and submitted the recommendation to the Separati on Authority. The Separati on Authority disapproved the Entry Level Separation portion of the recommendations and directed an administrative separation with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization of service for Misconduct (Drug Abuse).

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant is attending seminary school and wants to remove the stigma of an unfavorable discharge . There is no requirement, or law, that grants re-characterization solely on the issue of removing the stigma of an unfavorable discharge. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing educational opportunities or employment opportunities. Regulations limit the NDRB’s review solely to a determination of the propriety and the equity of a discharge. As such, this issue does not serve to provide a foundation upon which the NDRB can grant relief.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his misconduct was an isolated incident in otherwise honorable service and post - service conduct. Despite a service member’s prior record of service, certain serious offenses, even though isolated, warrant separation from the to maintain proper order and discipline. Violation of Article 112a is one such offense requiring mandatory processing for administrative separation regardless of grade, performance, or time in service. This usually results 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. However, his command did not pursue a punitive discharge but opted instead for the more lenient administrative discharge. The NDRB found the characterization of the Applicant’s discharge was equitable and consistent with the characterization of discharge given others in similar circumstances. Other than his statement on the DD Form 293, t he Applicant did not provide any evidence of his post - service character for the NDRB to consider. The Applicant could have provided documentation as detailed in the Post-Service Conduct paragraph in the Addendum with the recognition that 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. Considering his prior military service and post-service statement, the NDRB determined an upgrade was not warranted. Relief denied.

: (NDRB Issue) (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant’s discharge was warranted but improperly executed. The administrative separation board improperly recommended a discharge characterization of service of Entry Level Separation, which does not apply to drilling reservists who are not on active duty. Navy Operational Support Center Newport, RI then compounded the error by recording that the Applicant was discharged Under Other Than Honorable Conditions. In carefully reviewing the Applicant’s service record, the NDRB determined the Separati on Authority (Commander, Navy Personnel Command) eventually ordered in a message dated 22 December 2006 that the Applicant be separated for Misconduct (D rug A buse ) with a characterization of service of General (Under Honorable Conditions) after it reviewed the facts of the case and the proceedings of the administrative separation board . As the Separati on Authority is the sole authority to determine characterization of service at the time of discharge, the NDRB determined the characterization of service will change to General (Under Honorable Conditions). Partial relief granted. Full relief to Honorable was not granted due to the serious misconduct of using a controlled substance while in the Navy Reserve.

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 the discharge was warranted but improperly executed. Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall but 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 | 2013_Marine | MD1301376

Original file (MD1301376.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. Paragraph 6210, MISCONDUCT of...
NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301082

Original file (ND1301082.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: END OF OBLIGATED SERVICE Summary of Service Prior Service: USNR (DEP)19951229 - 19960115 USNR19960116 - 20010115USNR-R20010116 - 20010117USNR 20010118 - 20031213USNR 20031214 - 20071201USNR 20071202 - 20110103 Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20110104Age at Enlistment:Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20110914Highest Rank/Rate:ADCLength of Service:Year(s)Month(s) 11...
NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001086

Original file (ND1001086.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. The NDRB determined that the Applicant’s discharge accurately reflects his service in his most current enlistment.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...
USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1200543

Original file (MD1200543.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Based on this failure to participate, command administratively processed for separation in absentia. Full relief to Honorable was not granted, because the Applicant bears some responsibility for his failure to participate.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 but the narrative reason for separation shall remain...
USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1400808

Original file (MD1400808.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The record also shows the Applicant’s administrative separation board determined that the preponderance of the evidence supported that the Applicant had committed misconduct. However, the record shows the Applicant was separated from the Marine Corps on 27 February 2014, six weeks following his administrative separation board. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is...
NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00430

Original file (ND04-00430.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-RPSN, USN Docket No. _______________________________________________________________________ In accordance with 32 C.F.R., section 724.166; SECNAVINST 5420.174C, enclosure (1), paragraph 1.16, The American Legion submits to the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB or Board) the above issue in supplement to the Applicant’s petition. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW...
NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1300539

Original file (ND1300539.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 governmentalaffairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include...
USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1301843

Original file (MD1301843.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 | 2011_Navy | ND1100224

Original file (ND1100224.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant could have provided documentation as specified 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 a reason to change the characterization or narrative reason. Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901269

Original file (ND0901269.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

I was very immature and should have acted differently.” and “Although there were some minor disciplinary problems which were my fault, I regret them, and now looking at getting my life together.” While he may feel his immaturity was the underlying cause of his misconduct, the record of evidencedoes not demonstrate the Applicant was not responsible for his misconduct or should not be held accountable for his actions.For the Applicant’s edification, refusing Captain’s Mast may impact the...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201183

Similar Decisions