Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700528

Original file (ND0700528.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-GSMFN, USN
ND07-00528

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 200700313 Characterization Received:

Narrative Reason: MISCONDUCT DUE TO PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT Authority: MILPERSMAN 1910-140

Applicant’s Request:      Characterization change to:
                           Narrative Reason change to:
Applicant’s Issues:       1. VA Benefits
                           2. Immature in Service

Decision

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT .

Date: 20 07110 8 Location: Washington D.C          R epresentation :

Discussion

Issue 1: either which the Board cannot form the basis of relief for the Applicant, or the Board does not have the authority to grant the relief for which the Applicant petitioned. The Applicant is directed to the Addendum regarding .

Issue 2: ( ). The Applicant contends that his problems were attributed to his immaturity. While he may feel that this was the underlying cause of his misconduct, the record clearly reflects his willful misconduct and demonstrated he was unfit for further service. The evidence of record did not show that the Applicant was either not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions. When a Sailor ’s service has been honest and faithful, it is appropriate to characterize that service under honorable conditions. An under other than honorable conditions discharge is warranted when significant negative aspects of a member’s conduct or performance of duty outweigh the positive aspects of the member’s military record. The Applicant’s service was marred by one retention warning and one nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) , Article 90 ( Disobeying a Superior Commissioned Officer ). Violation of UCMJ Article 90 is considered a serious offense for which a punitive discharge is authorized if adjudged by a Special or General Courts Martial. An upgrade to honorable would be inappropriate.

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. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Medical and Service Record Entries , Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found that

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

The NDRB did note administrative error(s) on the original DD Form 214 :

         “ UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS ”
“ PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT ”

The NDRB will recommend to the C ommander, Navy Personnel Command , that the DD 214 be corrected as appropriate.

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive: US N R (DEP)      19971002 - 19980129
Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment: 19980130               Years Contracted : ; Extension:          Date of Discharge: 20010508
Length of Service : 3 Yrs 0 Mths 27 D ys    Lost Time : Days UA: 72 Days Confine d :
Education Level: 12       Age at Enlistment:       AFQT: 31          Highest Rank /Rate : GSM3
Evaluation marks (# of occasions):       Performance: NOT FOUND IN RECORD          Behavior: NOT FOUND IN RECORD
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): NONE

Medical/Service Record Entries Related to Characterization of Service or Basis for Discharge

19980131:        Retention Warning fraudulent induction by not disclosing documentation of an unborn child.

20000523 :        NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art. 90 – Disobeying a Superior Commissioned Officer .
         Awarded - RIR ( E-3 ); Restr for ( 60 days); Suspended for 6 months

20000608:        Punishment of RIR from CO’s NJP of 20000526 vacated this date for continued misconduct.

Discharge Process

Date Notified:                                       NOT FOUND IN RECORD
Reason for Discharge:     -

Least Favorable Characterization:

Date Applicant Responded to Notification:                  NOT FOUND IN RECORD
Rights Elected at Notification:
         Consult with Counsel
         Obtain Copies of Documents
         Submit Statement(s) (date)
         Administrative Board
         GCMCA review

Commanding Officer Recommendation (date):
Separation Authority (date):     NOT FOUND IN RECORD
Reason for discharge directed: -
Characterization directed:
Date Applicant Discharged:       20010508

Types of Documents Submitted by Applicant and Considered By Board

Related to Military Service:      Service and/or Medical Record:          Other Records:

Related to Post-Service Period:
         Employment:                        Finances:                          Education:
         Health/Medical Records:                   Substance Abuse:                           Criminal Records:
         Family/Personal Status:                   Community Service:                References:

Additional Statements From Applicant:    From Representative:
Other Documentation (Describe)

Pertinent Regulation/Law

A . Naval Military Personnel Manual Article . ( NAVPERS 15560C), Change 18, effective 12 Dec ember 1997 until 21 Aug ust 2002, Article 1910-140, SEPARATION BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT - PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT.

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 90 .

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 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 : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provi ded the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years from the 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. If a former member has been discharged for more than 15 years , has already been grante d a personal appearance hearing or has otherwise exhausted his opportunities before the NDRB, the Applicant may petition the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR), 2 Navy Annex, Washington, DC 20370-5100 for further review.

Service Benefits: The Veterans Administration determines eligibility for post-service benefits, not the Naval Discharge Review Board. 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.

Employmen t / Educational Opportunities : The Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational opportunities. Regulations limit the Board’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 Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) can make changes to reenlistment codes. Additionally, the Board 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 subsequently is processed for an administrative involuntary separation for misconduct, the disability evaluation is suspended. The Physical Evaluation Board case remains in suspense pending the outcome of the non-disability proceedings. If the action includes either a punitive or administrative discharge for misconduct, 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 “PTSD . ” Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records can grant this type of narrative reason change.

Automatic Upgrades - There is no law or regulation, which provides that an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in civilian life subsequent to leaving Naval service. The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge 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. Examples of documentation that may be provided to the Board include proof of educational pursuits, verifiable employment records, documentation of community service, credible evidence of a substance free lifestyle and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities.

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 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.

Board Membership: The names and votes of the members of the 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 | ND1500902

Original file (ND1500902.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. The undersigned are of the opinion that punishment, including confinement, will not be deleterious to the accused mental or physical health.” The NDRB finally noted that the Applicant appears to still have a diagnosis of personality disorder from the VA. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance...
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101076

Original file (ND1101076.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)20000630 - 20000907Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20000908Age at Enlistment:Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20050419Highest Rank/Rate:FNLength of Service:Years Months11 DaysEducation Level:AFQT: 42EvaluationMarks:Performance:NFIRBehavior:NFIROTA: NFIRAwards and Decorations (per DD 214):NAVY”E ” NJP:NONE CC:...
NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700463

Original file (ND0700463.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Board determined that the documentation provided by the Applicant did not mitigate the misconduct that resulted in the characterization of discharge.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. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Medical and Service Record...
USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1102063

Original file (MD1102063.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. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are...
USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801646

Original file (MD0801646.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Despite the Applicant’s specific request for a “BCD ” , the NDRB reviewed the Applicant’s caseto determine if clemency is warranted. The Applicant has requested an upgrade in his discharge characterization to “General (Under Honorable Conditions)”. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years from the date of discharge.
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901484

Original file (ND0901484.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities. A preponderance of the evidence reviewed supports the conclusion the Applicant committed a serious offense, that separation from the Naval service was appropriate, and a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge was warranted.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entriesand discharge...
NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0701210

Original file (ND0701210.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant’s service was marred by four nonjudicial punishments for violations of the UCMJ Articles 90 (disobeying a superior commissioned officer, X2), 92 (failure to obey, X2), and 86 (unauthorized absence, X8). The Applicant’s Administrative board found that the evidence supported both reasons for separation and unanimously recommended separation based on the Applicant’s misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800192

Original file (ND0800192.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Types of Documents SubmittedRelated to Military Service: DD 214: Service and/or Medical Record: Other Records: Related to Post-Service Period: Employment: Finances: Education/Training: Health/Medical Records: Substance Abuse: Criminal Records: Family/Personal Status: Community Service: References: Additional Statements From Applicant: From Representation: From Member of Congress: Other Documentation (Describe) DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW...
NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0701183

Original file (ND0701183.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request: Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USNR (DEP)19970214 - 19990504Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 19970505Period of enlistment: Years Months Date of Discharge:20000404Length of Service: Yrs Mths07 DysEducation Level: Age at Enlistment:AFQT: 74Highest Rank/Rate:MM3Evaluation marks:Performance: 3.0(5) Behavior:2.4(5)OTA: 2.7Awards and Decorations (per DD 214): Rifle , Pistol Periods...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900219

Original file (ND0900219.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The record of evidence shows the Applicant was properly notified of discharge proceedings based on the reasons of “Pattern of Misconduct” and “Commission of a Serious Offense.” The Separating Authority should have determined the primary basis for the separation when approving the recommended discharge. The NDRB therefore determined the remedy for this administrative error is to change the Narrative Reason for separation to the more favorable of the two reasons, “Pattern of Misconduct”, and...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700528

Similar Decisions