Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201347

Original file (ND1201347.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-EOCR, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20120605

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)        20090106 - 20090930     Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20091001     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20120207      Highest Rank/Rate: EOCN
Length of Service: Y ear( s ) M onth( s ) 07 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 45
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 3.0 ( 2 )      Behavior: 1.0 ( 2 )        OTA: 2.59

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 21 5 ):      Rifle SS Pistol SSDR ACM

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP :

- 20100910 :      Article (General A rticle , 2 specifications )
         Specification 1: Disorderly conduct, drunkenness
         Specification 2: Drunkenness-incapacitation for performance of duties through prior wrongful indulgence in intoxicating liquor
         Awarded: Suspended:

S CM :    SPCM:    C C :

Retention Warning Counseling :

- 20100910 :       For disorderly conduct, drunkenness , and drunkenness-incapacitation for performance of duties through prior wrongful indulgence in intoxicating liquor or any drug.

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 he was innocent of misconduct and was refused the opportunity to contest the charges at court-martial before being administratively separated .

Decision

Date : 20 1 3 0410 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 NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13) warning and for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 134 ( General A rticle, 2 specifications , disorderly conduct and drunkenness). The Applicant completed substance abuse counseling after his first NJP . During deployment in support of OPERATION ENDURING FREEDOM in Afghanistan, the Applicant was charged with violation of UCMJ Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation, CENTCOM General Order 1B , wrongful possession or use of alcohol). The Applicant refused NJP and demanded trial by court-martial . He subsequently refused a Summary Court-Martial and demanded a Special Court-Martial. His commanding officer decided not to refer charges to a Special Court-Martial and opted to ad ministratively process for separation. When notified of administrative separation processing using the procedure, the Applicant exercised rights to consult with a qualified counsel and submit a written statement . The Applicant was not entitled to an administrative separation board.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends he was innocent of misconduct and was refused the opportunity to contest the charges at court-martial before being administratively separated. The Applicant’s record includes a statement from his commanding officer (CO) that during an inspection , a bag with the Applicant’s name on it was found near the Applicant’s bed and contain ed three 50ml bottles of alcohol. The Applicant subsequently refused NJP and a Summary Court-Martial and demanded a trial by Special Court-Martial. A service member does not have the right to appear before a Special Court-Martial if he demands one. It is the commanding officer’s decision as to whether or not charges are to be referred to a Special Court-Martial. In the Applicant’s case, his CO decided not to refer charges to a Special Court-Martial and opted instead to administratively process the Applicant for separation. Because separation processing is administrative in nature and not a legal proceeding, the concept of “innocent until proven guilty” does not apply. In accordance with the Naval Military Personnel Manual, service members may be separated based on the commission of a serious military or civilian offense when the commanding officer believes the specific circumstances of the offense warrant separation and the offense would warrant a punitive discharge if adjudicated at trial by court-martial for the same or closely related offense. Commission of a serious offense does not require adjudication by nonjudicial or judicial proceedings or civilian conviction , however, the offense must be substantiated by a preponderance of evidence. The commanding officer determined that a preponderance of the evidence existed that he had violated an order (Article 92) by the alcohol being in the Applicant’s room in a backpack with his name on it. Violation of UCMJ Article 92 is considered a serious offense per Appendix 12 of the Manual for Courts-Martial and could have resulted in a punitive discharge (i.e., Bad Conduct) if adjudicated at a Special Court-Martial. Although the Applicant met the requirements for administrative separation for Misconduct (Serious Offense), Misconduct (Pattern of Misconduct), and Alcohol Rehabilitation Failure, his CO only recommended a n Under Honorable Conditions (General) characterization of service. After a complete review of the Applicant’s service records and his statement, the NDRB determined his discharge was proper and equitable. He did not have the right to appear before a Special Court-Martial, his CO determined by a preponderance of the evidence that he violated an order, violation of this order warranted administrative separation processing, and the General Court-Martial Convening Authority reviewed the case and found it to be proper. 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. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 36, effective 18 August 2011 until Present, 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 134.

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 | 2010_Navy | ND1000313

Original file (ND1000313.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The NDRB determined that the Applicant’s command did consider his previous performance and awards in recommending him for a General, vice an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions, discharge.Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service and record entries, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reason for separation shall remain .The Applicant remains eligible for a...
NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200811

Original file (ND1200811.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Additionally, not receiving additional help does not excuse or mitigate his subsequent alcohol-related misconduct. 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...
USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1200881

Original file (MD1200881.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900958

Original file (ND0900958.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. By a unanimous vote of 5-0, the Board determined the characterization of service received, “Under Other Than Honorable Conditions,” and the narrative reason for the discharge, “Pattern of Misconduct,” shall remain as issued based on his length of service and the UCMJ violations involved. You may view DoD Instruction 1332.28 and other Decisional Documents by going online...
NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700131

Original file (ND0700131.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Discharge Improper2. The Board determined that the documentation provided by the Applicant did not mitigate the misconduct that resulted in the characterization of discharge. With respect to a discharge adjudged by a court-martial, the action of the NDRB is restricted to upgrades based on clemency.
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900381

Original file (ND0900381.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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 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...
USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1500881

Original file (MD1500881.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: Types of Witnesses Who Testified Expert: Character:...
NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1300270

Original file (ND1300270.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities. Relief granted.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 change to .The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing for a period...
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101555

Original file (ND1101555.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

After careful consideration, the NDRB determined that the Applicant was aware of his rights and that he had ample opportunity to defend himself by presenting an adequate defense at NJP or demanding trial by court-martial.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...
NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000187

Original file (ND1000187.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Based on the offenses committed by the Applicant, command administratively processed for separation. His six-year enlistment contract and generous enlistment bonus accounted for the nearly two years of demanding education required of this rating and the highly specialized and costly training associated with this field.After thorough examination of the available evidence to include the Applicant’s record of service, the Board determined that the Applicant failed to maintain the high...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201347

Similar Decisions