Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201252

Original file (ND1201252.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-FN, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20120510

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)        20020518 - 20020603     Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20020604     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20060630      Highest Rank/Rate: FN
Length of Service: Y ear( s ) M onth( s ) 27 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 32
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 2.7 ( 3 )      Behavior: 2.3 ( 3 )        OTA: 2.33

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):

TL per DD214: 20060501-20060528, 28 days

NJP :

- 20030 624 :      Article ( Failure to obey order or regulation )
         Article (Larceny)
         Awarded : Susp ended:

- 20050908 :      Article (Assault)
         Article (General A rticle, communicating a threat , 2 specifications )
         Awarded: Suspended:

S CM :    SPCM:    C C :

Retention Warning Counseling :

- 20021018 :       For your defective enlistment and induction due to fraudulent enlistment into naval service as evidenced by your undisclosed civil convictions

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 seeks to use the GI Bill that he paid into.
2.       The Applicant contends that he is eligible for an upgrade after six months.
3.       The Applicant contends that he regrets going UA and went UA because his command would not let him stay in the Navy.

Decision

Date : 20 1 3 0301             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 NAV PERS 1070/613 (Page 13) warning and for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article (Failure to obey order or regulation) , Article (Larceny) , Article (Assault) , and Article (General A rticle, communicating a threat , 2 specifications ). In addition, the Applicant was in an unauthorized absence (UA) status from 01 May 2006 to 28 May 2006. Although the Applicant had significant misconduct during his enlistment, he was allowed to complete his active obligated service and was discharged at the end of his enlistment on 30 June 2006. The Applicant’s narrative reason for separation is Completion of Required Active Service.

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant seeks to use the GI Bill that he paid into . 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. The NDRB is only authorized to review the propriety and equity of a discharge.

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant contends that he is eligible for an upgrade after six months. 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. Neither the NDRB nor any other Navy command automatically upgrades a discharge after a specified amount of time. Former service members are eligible to have their discharges reviewed by the NDRB within 15 years after their discharges and are eligible for a documentary review and a personal appearance hearing in Washington, DC.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends that he regrets going UA and went UA because his command would not let him stay in the Navy. Although the Applicant was UA from 01 May 2006 to 28 May 2006, there is no record of counseling or punishment resulting in nonjudicial punishment or court-martial . The Applicant was allowed to complete his active obligated service and was separated with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization of service . In accordance with Naval Military Personnel Manual Article 1910-104, a member separated upon expiration of enlistment or fulfillment of service obligation is eligible for a characterization of Honorable, unless a General is warranted on the basis of the Enlisted Performance Evaluation System. If during the current enlistment, the servicemember’s evaluation overall trait average is 2.49 or below, then it is appropriate to receive a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge. The Applicant’s service record reflects an overall trait average for this enlistment of 2. 33 . Therefore, a General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization is appropriate. He did not receive a General because he went UA, rather, he received a General because of his low evaluation marks over the course of his enlistment. The Applicant’s below-average evaluation marks and misconduct are probably the primary reasons why he was not allowed to re-enlist. With his serious violations of larceny and assault earlier in his enlistment, he is extremely fortunate not to have been discharged Under Other Than Honorable Conditions for Misconduct (Serious Offense). The Applicant also met the requirements to be separated for Misconduct (Pattern of Misconduct). However, despite his below-average performance and misconduct, his command allowed him to finish his enlistment and receive a very equitable General characterization of service. 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. Navy Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 11, 20 June 2005 until Present, Article 1910-104, SEPARATION BY REASON OF EXPIRATION OF ACTIVE OBLIGATED SERVICE (EAOS).

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

USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1100249

Original file (MD1100249.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’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 | ND0901401

Original file (ND0901401.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-MNSA, USN Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request Application Received: 20090428 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) 20041120 - 20041215 Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20041216 Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: Years Extension Date of Discharge:...
USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801122

Original file (MD0801122.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant’s medical record was not available for the NDRB to review. Specifically, the Applicant’s record of medical care on 11 April 2006 shows the Applicant was not taking his prescribed medication because he “…feared they would be “addictive”. The NDRB specifically advises the Applicant the VA determines the eligibility for enrollment independent of the Applicant’s characterization of service as determined by the Marine Corps.
USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1001317

Original file (MD1001317.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. ” Additional Reviews : After...
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1102120

Original file (ND1102120.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

On 29 January 2009, the Commander, Navy Personnel Command directed the Applicant be discharged (in absentia) with an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge due to Misconduct (AWOL). Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, and the administrative separation process, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reason for separation shall...
NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000814

Original file (ND1000814.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 | 2008_Navy | ND0801725

Original file (ND0801725.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Furthermore, the record of evidence does not show any evidence of processing for a discharge other than the one given to him for the pattern of misconduct. The NDRB determined an upgrade would be inappropriate.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...
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900492

Original file (MD0900492.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USMCR (DEP)20020706 - 20020908Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20020909Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: Years MonthsDate of Discharge:20070803Highest Rank:Length of Service: Year(s)Month(s)25 Day(s)Education Level: AFQT:30MOS: 3531Proficiency/Conduct Marks (# of occasions):NFIRFitness Reports: Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):Rifle...
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900480

Original file (MD0900480.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USMCR (DEP)20050328 - 20050605Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20050606Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: Years MonthsDate of Discharge:20060616Highest Rank: Length of Service: Year(s)Month(s)01 Day(s)Education Level: AFQT:64MOS: 9900Proficiency/Conduct Marks (# of occasions):2.1(NFIR)/2.1 (NFIR)Fitness Reports: Awards and Decorations (per...
NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001690

Original file (ND1001690.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. Partial relief...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201252

Similar Decisions