Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1300059

Original file (ND1300059.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-ETSN, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20121012

Characterization of Service Received:

Narrative Reason for Discharge:
Authority for Discharge: MILPERSMAN

Applicant’s Request:      Characterization change to:
         Narrative Reason change to:       Completion of Active Service or equivalent narrative

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive:         US N R (DEP)        20100107 - 20100322     Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20100323     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20111019      Highest Rank/Rate: ETSN
Length of Service: Y ear( s ) M onth( s ) 27 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 86
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: NFIR         Behavior: NFIR OTA: NFIR

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Pistol

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP :     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 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 92 .

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

Applicant’s Issues

1. The Applicant contends his discharge was inequitable , because he was only charged with one violation of a Military Protective Order (MPO).

Decision

Date : 20 1 3 0620 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 sta ndards of equity and propriety. The Applicant’s record of service included an Article 32 hearing to determine allegations of violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 92 ( Failure to obey order or regulation , 1 specification of violation of MPO ) , Article 120 ( Rape, sexual assault, and other sexual misconduct , 2 specifications), Article 125 (Sodomy , 1 specification ) , and Article 128 ( Assault , 1 specification). The Article 32 hearing determined that reasonable grounds existed to believe the Applicant committed a violation of Article 92 , but that reasonable grounds did not exist to believe the Applicant committed the additional charges of violating Article s 120, 125, and 128. The Article 32 hearing recommended the Applicant be referred to his command for nonjudicial punishment (NJP) . The command did not pursue NJP but processed the Applicant for administrative separation for Misconduct (Serious Offense) based upon the Article 92 violation. 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 admin istrative board.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his discharge was inequitable , because he was only charged with one violation of a n MPO. After careful review of the Applicant’s statement, official service records, records of Article 32 hearing , and records of the Naval Criminal Investigative Service investigation, the NDRB determined the Applicant’s discharge was proper but not equitable. The Applicant was discharged based on his violation of a n MPO, but the NDRB found his separation with a General characterization of service to be inconsistent with misconduct under similar circumstances. It was recommended at the time by the Article 32 officer that he only receive NJP. While the Applicant’s commanding officer was proper in processing the Applicant for administrative separation for Misconduct (Serious Offense), the NDRB determined it was not equitable and v oted 5-0 to upgrade the discharge to Honorable. S ince there is no other narrative reason for separation that accurately describes the reason the Applicant was separated, the NDRB determined the reason for the Applicant’s discharge shall change to Secretarial Authority. Relief granted.

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 change to . 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 | 2015_Marine | MD1501251

Original file (MD1501251.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall remain UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS and the narrative reason for separation shall remain MISCONDUCT . ” 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. If the action includes either a punitive or administrative discharge for misconduct or for...
USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1500321

Original file (MD1500321.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,...
USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1401187

Original file (MD1401187.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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 date of discharge. ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant Complaint Procedures : If you believe the...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800894

Original file (ND0800894.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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 conduct mitigates the reason for the characterization of discharge.The Applicant provided as evidence of post-service accomplishments. The Board determined the characterization of service received, “General (Under Honorable Conditions)”, was an appropriate characterization...
NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000264

Original file (ND1000264.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities. The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, reflects his willful failure to meet the requirements of his contract and falls far short of that required for an upgrade of his characterization of service.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service,...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901927

Original file (ND0901927.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant should be aware 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 mitigates the reason for the characterization of discharge. Without sufficient documentary evidence,the NDRB cannot form a basis of relief.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, and...
NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001832

Original file (ND1001832.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. No change is warranted.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...
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100902

Original file (ND1100902.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant seeks an upgrade to re-enlist in the U. S. Navy. The Applicant did not have a pre-service waiver for illicit drug use prior to entering the Navy.Based on the violation of the Navy’s Zero-Tolerance Drug Policy, processing for administrative separation is mandatory. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a...
USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801898

Original file (MD0801898.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant’s medical record shows the Applicant was seen by medical personnel regularly, especially between December 2006 and June 2007 when his NJP and SCM were held, for a variety of reasons including a required mess duty physical, physical ailment and mental health treatment. Less than a week into his restriction, Private Greene drank alcohol (despite being on restriction), attempted to drive a vehicle while intoxicated, and was in a car accident before he reached the exit of the...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801175

Original file (ND0801175.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. 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 conduct mitigates the reason for the characterization of discharge. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1300059

Similar Decisions