Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201296

Original file (ND1201296.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-OC, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20120523

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:         NONE              Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20090626     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20091002      Highest Rank/Rate: OC
Length of Service: Y ear( s ) M onth( s ) 07 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: N/A
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: N/A         Behavior: N/A/          OTA: N/A

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      NONE

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP :
- 20090827 :      Article (General A rticle - Indecent assault)
         Awarded: Suspended: [Extracted from personal statement dated 20090903]

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), Change 23, effective 12 June 2008 until 9 November 2009, Article 1910-142, SEPARATION 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 1 34 .

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

Applicant’s Issues

1.        The Applicant contends he was innocent of the misconduct for which he was separated.
2.       The Applicant contends he was treated unfairly by his command and without due process.

Decision

Date : 20 1 3 0314             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 proprie ty. The Applicant’s record of service included for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 134 ( General A rticle, 1 specification of indecent assault). The Applicant’s record is incomplete , however, b ased on the offense committed by the Applicant, command administratively processed for separation. The NDRB did not have the Applicant’s administrative separation package to determine whether or not the Applicant waived rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request a General Court-Martial Convening Authority review .

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends he was innocent of the misconduct for which he was separated. The NDRB was unable to review the Applicant’s complete discharge package, as it was not included in his official service record. The NDRB presumed regularity in governmental affairs in that the Separation Authority and Staff Judge Advocate review of the discharge package ensured that the Applicant was afforded all of his administrative rights pursuant to the separation process. The Applicant did not submit any documentation to rebut any presumption of regularity in gov ernmental affairs by the NDRB. The Manual for Courts-Martial United States, Part V, indicates the rules of evidence, other than with respect to privileges, do not apply at NJP proceedings. Therefore, hearsay evidence is permissible , and the Applicant’s contention the NJP was based on circumstantial, and no physical, evidence has no merit. The Applicant has not presented any documentation to prove the commanding officer disregarded relevant information or failed to comply with applicable regulations during the NJP proceedings. Relief denied.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends he was treated unfairly by his command and without due process. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the Applicant produced any evidence, to support the contention the command treated him unfairly. The Applicant had an NJP for violation of UCMJ Art i cle 134 while still in an entry level status. Violations of UCMJ Article 134 are considered serious offenses for which a punitive discharge (i.e., Bad Conduct) is authorized. Based upon available records, nothing indicates that the Applicant’s discharge was in any way inconsistent with the standards of discipline in the Navy. A preponderance of the evidence reviewed supports the conclusion that the Applicant committed a serious offense and that separation was appropriate. An Uncharacterized discharge is warranted when s eparation is initiated while a member is within the first 180 days of continuous active duty except when the characterization of service as Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (UOTHC) is authorized or Honorable is clearly warranted. While the Applicant had misconduct that would rate an UOTHC discharge, his command leniently recommended an Uncharacterized discharge. T here was no evidence of unusual circumstances involving personal conduct and performance that would merit an Honorable characterization. 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 15 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 | 2015_Navy | ND1500268

Original file (ND1500268.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities. ” 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.
USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1200027

Original file (MD1200027.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Based on the offenses committed by the Applicant, command administratively processed for separation. 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 years from the...
NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201720

Original file (ND1201720.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)20040207 - 20041109Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20041110Age at Enlistment:Period of Enlistment: Years19 MONTHSExtensionDate of Discharge:20100311Highest Rank/Rate:MN2Length of Service:Years Months2 DaysEducation Level:AFQT: 55EvaluationMarks:Performance:2.6(7)Behavior:2.3(7)OTA: 2.66Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):Rifle...
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1102022

Original file (ND1102022.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Therefore, I consider her to have no potential for continued Naval Service and her actions are not conducive to good order and discipline on board this command or in the Navy.” After a complete review of the record, the NDRB discerned no unfair treatment and further determined that an upgrade was not warranted. 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...
USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1400983

Original file (MD1400983.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The NDRB found the Applicant’s contention to be without merit and determined that his separation for his misconduct was appropriate. 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...
USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0800034

Original file (MD0800034.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request: Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USMCR (DEP) 20000621 - 20000730 Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20000731Period of enlistment: Years Months Date of Discharge: 20030530Length of Service: Yrs Mths07 Dys Education Level: Age at Enlistment: AFQT: 49MOS: 3381 Highest Rank: Fitness reports: Proficiency/Conduct marks (# of occasions): 3.7(6)/3.5(6) Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):...
NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200266

Original file (ND1200266.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, recordentries, and discharge process, the Board found However, the assigned Narrative Reason for Separation was incorrect. ” 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...
USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1500682

Original file (MD1500682.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

An appeal or separation board would have provided an opportunity to contest the propriety of leave processing at the command. ” 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.
USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1301855

Original file (MD1301855.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Although his notification of administrative separation processing was not found in his record, the Applicant elected his right to appear before an administrative separation board, which leniently recommended he receive a General discharge for Misconduct (Drug Abuse). 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...
USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1500240

Original file (MD1500240.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. Paragraph 6210,...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201296

Similar Decisions