Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1300968

Original file (ND1300968.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-AMAR, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20130327

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)        20020628 - 20030114     Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20030115     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20060213      Highest Rank/Rate: AMAN
Length of Service: Y ear s M onth s 05 D a ys
Education Level:        AFQT: 53
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 3.0 ( 1 )      Behavior: 4.0 ( 1 )        OTA: 3.17

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):

Periods of UA :

NJP :

- 20050107 :      Article (Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer , 2 specifications )
         Awarded: Suspended:

S CM :    CC:

SPCM:

- 20050728 :       Art icle (Wrongful use, possession, etc., of controlled substance s, 3 specifications )
         Specification 1: D id, at or near Fallon, Nevada, on or about 25 April 2005, wrongfully use marijuana
         Specification 2: D id, on or near Vancouver, Canada on or about 21 June 2005, wrongfully use marijuana
         Specification 3: D id, in Vancouver, Washington on or about 11 July 2005, wrongfully use marijuana
         Sentence : CONF 90 days (20050728-20050821, 24 days) BCD

Retention Warning Counseling :

- 20050109 :       For CO’s NJP of 20050109 for violation of the UCMJ, Article 91 (2 specifications) (Insubordinate conduct toward a Petty Officer)

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 12, effective 19 September 2005 until 18 December 2007, Article 5815-010, EXECUTING A DISHONORABLE OR BAD CONDUCT DISCHARGE.

B. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part IV, Para 403m(7)(a), Presumption Concerning Court-Martial Specifications .

C . 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 seeks clemency to qualify for the G.I Bill.
2.       The Applicant contends his in-service performance and conduct warrants clemency.
3 .       The Applicant contends another servicemember was punished less harshly for similar misconduct.
4 .       The Applicant contends his post-service conduct warrants clemency.

Decision

Date : 20 1 3 1204    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 discharge if such change is warranted. In reviewing discharges, the NDRB presumes regularity in the conduct of Government affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant. With respect to a discharge adjudged by a court-martial case, 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. In response to the Applicant’s clemency request, relevant and material facts stated in a court-martial specification are presumed by the NDRB to be established facts. The Applicant’s case was considered under the pertinent standards of equity to determine if any factors in this particular case merited clemency. The Applicant’s record of service included NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13) warning, for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 91 ( Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer, 2 specifications) , and for of the UCMJ: Article 112a ( Wrongful use, possession, etc., of controlled substance s , 3 specifications ). The Applicant also had a pre-service drug waiver for using marijuana prior to entering the Navy. The Applicant’s service record documents a punitive conviction and punishment, as adjudged by a Special Court-Martial, on 28 July 2005 . A qualified legal defense counsel represented the Applicant throughout the trial by Special Court-Martial process. Given the facts of the case, the Special Cour t-Martial awarded the Applicant a Bad Conduct Discharge, reduction in pay grade to E-1, forfeiture of $823 pay per month for a period of three months, and confinement for a period of 90 days. The case was submitted for review to the U.S. Navy-Marine Corps Cou rt of Criminal Appeals , and the findings were affirmed on 29 November 2005 .

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant seeks clemency to qualify for the G.I Bill. 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. 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.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his in-service per formance and conduct warrants clemency. During the Applicant’s 3 years of service, he was found guilty at an NJP for o f Article 91 ( 2 specificat i ons ) and a Special Court-Martial for viol ation of Article 112a ( 3 specifications ) . After a complete review of the Applicant’s service records and his statement, the NDRB found the evidence of record did not contain sufficient mitigating or extenuating factors to offset the seriousness of the offenses for which the disch arge was awarded. Clemency denied.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant c ontends another servicemember was punished less harshly for similar misconduct. The NDRB reviews the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge individually, on a case-by-case basis. If such a review reveals an impropriety or inequity, relief is in order. Regulations permit relief on equitable grounds if the Applicant’s discharge is inconsistent with standards of discipline of the Naval Service. Based upon available records, nothing indicates that the Applicant’s discharge was in any way inconsistent with the standards of discipline in the United States Navy. Clemency denied.

4 : (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant cont ends his post-service conduct warrants clemency. The Applicant stated that he no longer uses controlled substances and is working and attending school full time. The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the re-characterization of a discharge. However, there is no law, or regulation, that provides that an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in civilian life subsequent to leaving the service. Normally, to permit relief, a procedural impropriety or inequity must have been found to exist during the period of enlistment in question. Besides the Applicant’s statement on the DD Form 293, he failed to provide any documentary evidence on his behalf for post-service consideration. 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. Without post-service documentary evidence, the Board determined clemency was not warranted. C lemency 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.

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 | 2012_Marine | MD1201405

Original file (MD1201405.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

” 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. Additionally, the NDRB does not have the authority to change a narrative reason for separation to one indicating a medical disability or...
USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201357

Original file (MD1201357.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant did not meet the minimum standards to warrant an Honorable discharge; therefore, a General discharge 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 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. ...
NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201865

Original file (ND1201865.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 enhance employment and educational 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. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge...
NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000531

Original file (ND1000531.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

A request for a waiver can be submitted during the processing of a formal application for reenlistment through a recruiter.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, and administrative discharge process, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS) and the narrative reason for separation shall remain ALCOHOL REHABILITATION FAILURE.The Applicant...
NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0601173

Original file (ND0601173.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Despite a servicemember’s prior record of service, certain serious offenses, though isolated, warrant separation from the naval service in order to maintain proper order and discipline. Elements of Discharge: [INVOLUNTARY] Date Notified:NOT FOUND IN RECORDReason for Discharge Least Favorable Characterization Authorized: Date Applicant Responded to Notification: NOT FOUND IN RECORDRights Elected at Notification:Consult with Counsel Administrative Board SEPARATION CODE INDICATES BOARD...
NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200637

Original file (ND1200637.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends his misconduct was as a result of family issues.2. Relief denied.Issue 3: (Decisional) (Propriety/Equity) RELIEF NOT WARRANTED. ” 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 | 2009_Marine | MD0900066

Original file (MD0900066.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall MISCONDUCT.Discussion :().The Applicant contends he is entitled to a discharge upgrade because the punishment he received was too severe for his minor misconduct.In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of Government affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant. The Applicant appears to understand his administrative separation was part of the...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801347

Original file (ND0801347.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...
NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0601080

Original file (ND0601080.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Elements of Discharge: [INVOLUNTARY] Discharge Process: Not found in record Recommendation of Commanding Officer (date): Not found in recordDischarge directed by (date):Not found in recordNarrative reason directed:Not found in recordCharacterization directed: Not found in recordDate Applicant Discharged: 20050608 Additional Information Considered by Board Type of documentation submitted by the Applicant and considered by the Board Document Type #Pages Related to Period of Service Under...
USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801380

Original file (MD0801380.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record, 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...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1300968

Similar Decisions