Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1400611

Original file (ND1400611.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-HTFN, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20140219

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)        20100714 - 20100926     Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20100927     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20130920      Highest Rank/Rate: HT3
Length of Service: Y ear( s ) M onth( s ) 23 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 48
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 2.3 ( 3 )      Behavior: 2.3 ( 3 )        OTA: 2.48

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Pistol

Period of UA : 20130703 - 20130704, 1 day / C ONF :

NJP :

- 20130813 :      Article (Absence without leave)
         Article (Failure to obey order or regulation)
         Article 134 (General A rticle)
         Awarded: Suspended:

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 :

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

Applicant’s Issues

1. The Applicant contends he was wrongfully forced out , and evaluations and meritorious documents were altered or deleted from his file.
Decision

Date : 20140724 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 for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 86 (Absence without leave) , Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation) , and Article 1 34 (General A rticle). Based on the offenses 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 an administrative board or a General Court-Martial Convening Authority review . However, the Applicant has a separation code of HKQ on his DD Form 214, which indicates he waived his administrative board.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends he was wrongfully forced out , and evaluations and meritorious documents were altered or deleted from his file. The NDRB presumes regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant. The Applicant submitted a copy of his certificate for being awarded the Honor Graduate at the Basic Engineering Common Core Course. However, this document does not prove that he was wrongfully forced out or that his evaluations and meritorious documents were wrongly altered or deleted from his file . The record shows the Applicant was found guilty at NJP for violating UCMJ A rticles 86, 92, and 134. In addition, the record indicates the Applicant waived his right to present his case for retention to an administrative board. If the Applicant felt he was mistakenly charged with a crime, it was his obligation to contest those charges at the tim e they were made. During an administrative separation board, he would have had the opportunity to mount a defense against the charges. The e vidence submitted by the Applicant does not support his contention that he was wrongfully discharged , therefore, the NDRB must rely upon the presumption of regularity in the conduct of Government affairs. 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 92 .

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 | 2012_Navy | ND1200849

Original file (ND1200849.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’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 | 2011_Navy | ND1101836

Original file (ND1101836.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant seeks an upgrade in order to re-enlist in the Armed Forces.2. Based on the offenses committed by the Applicant, his command administratively processed him for separation due to a Pattern of Misconduct.The NDRB did not have the Applicant’s administrative separation package to determine whether or not the Applicant waived his rights to consult with a qualified...
USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0800962

Original file (MD0800962.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall AS A RESULT OF A COURT-MARTIAL.Discussion Issue 1(Clemency): RELIEF NOT WARRANTED.The Applicant requests an upgrade from a “ Bad Conduct Discharge ” to “ Uncharacterized”. 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1400246

Original file (ND1400246.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends stress led to his misconduct.2. 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1400521

Original file (ND1400521.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant seeks to improve his employment opportunities.2. ” 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...
USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1301185

Original file (MD1301185.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Clemency 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. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members...
NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200127

Original file (ND1200127.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, testimony, and discharge process, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reason for separation shall remain .The Applicant is not eligible for further review from the NDRB. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing,...
NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301758

Original file (ND1301758.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Full relief to Honorable was not granted due to the serious nature of the misconduct.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entriesand discharge process, the Board found the discharge was proper and equitable at the time of discharge. ” 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1300383

Original file (ND1300383.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Summary of ServicePrior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)20080424 - 20080629Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20080630Age at Enlistment:Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20101021Highest Rank/Rate:HNLength of Service:Year(s)Month(s) 22 Day(s)Education Level:AFQT: 35EvaluationMarks:Performance:3.0(4)Behavior:2.3(4)OTA: 2.79Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):Periods of...
NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301232

Original file (ND1301232.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. With his NJP - Page 13 retention warning - NJP during his enlistment, he met the requirements for administrative separation for a Pattern of Misconduct and warranted a General discharge.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...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1400611

Similar Decisions