Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700554

Original file (ND0700554.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-ATAA, USN
ND07-00554

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20070322 Characterization Received:

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

Applicant’s Request:      Characterization change to:
                           Narrative Reason change to:
Applicant’s Issues:       1. Reenlistment Opportunities
                           2. Immature in Service
                           3. Post Service

Decision

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

Date: 20 071115 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 and his inability to control his anger . 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. A general (u nder 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. T he Board found that the Applicant ’s service records were incomplete to the extent that there was no documentation of the Applicant’s second NJP . Th e Board presumed regularity in the conduct of government affairs for this NJP . The Applicant’s service was marred by one retention warning , one documented nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice , Article 92 (Failure to obey a lawful order and Article 86 (Unauthorized absence) and one Report of Offenses for violation of the UCMJ, Article 86 (Unauthorized absence) , Article 91 (Insubordinate conduct toward a petty officer), and Article 117 (Provoking speeches or gestures) . Violation of UCMJ Article s 91, 92, and 117 are considered serious offense s for which a punitive discharge is authorized if adjudged by a Special or General Courts Martial. An upgrade to honorable would be inappropriate.

Issue 3: ( ). The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. However, 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 the civilian life subsequent to leaving the service. Normally, to permit relief, a procedural impropriety or inequity must have been found to have existed during the period of enlistment in question. Outstanding post-service conduct, to the extent that 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. The Applicant provided two character reference statement s and one statement of employment in addition to his own statement as documentation of post-service accomplishments. The Applicant's efforts need to be more encompassing than those provided. For example, the Applicant could have produced evidence of continuing educational pursuits, documentation of community service, and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities. The Board determined that the documentation provided by the Applicant did not mitigate the misconduct that resulted in the charact erization 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 Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found that

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive: US N R (DEP)      19981222 - 19990815              Active:
Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment: 19990816               Years Contracted : ; Extension:          Date of Discharge: 20001218
Length of Service : 01 Yrs 04 Mths 03 D ys          Lost Time : Days UA: Days Confine d :
Education Level:         Age at Enlistment:       AFQT: 91          Highest Rank /Rate : ATAA
Evaluation marks (# of occasions):       Performance: 3.0 ( 1 )       Behavior: 3.0 ( 1 )                  OTA: 3.00
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): NONE

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

20001020:        NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art. 92 – Failure to obey a lawful order from Lieutenant T_ K_, viol UCMJ Art. 86 – Unauthorized absence.
         Awarded - FOP ( 1//2 month ) for ( 2 months) suspended ; RIR (E-1) suspended; Restr for (30 days); Extra duties (30 days).

20001020 :        Retention Warning for violation of UCMJ Article 92-failure to obey a lawful order, Article 86-Unauthorized absence .

20001207:        Report of Offenses: Charge I: Violation of Article 86 (Unauthorized Absence) , Charge II: Violation of Article 91 (Insubordinate conduct toward a petty officer), Charge III: Violation of Article 117 (Provoking speeches or gestures). Applicant signed acknowledging the nature of the offenses.

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:       20001218

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) High School Transcript, Applicant 's Naval Photograph ,

Pertinent Regulation/Law

A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 18, effective
12 Dec 1997 until 21 Aug 2002, Article 1910-140 (formerly 3630600), 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 s 91, 92, and 117 .

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 | 2006_Navy | ND0600825

Original file (ND0600825.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant’s DD Form 214 (Member 4) (2)ResumeVA Form 22-1995 (Request for Change of Program or Place of Training) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of...
USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700909

Original file (MD0700909.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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 Summary of ServicePrior Service: Inactive: USMCR (DEP) 19991118 - 19991128 Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 19991129 Years Contracted: 4; Extension: Date of Discharge: 20020607Length of Service: 02 Yrs 06 Mths08 DysLost Time:Days UA: Days Confined: Education...
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900206

Original file (MD0900206.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant provided no documentation or further evidence in support of his request to be upgrade to “Honorable.” The Board determined the awarded discharge characterization was appropriate and an upgrade is 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...
USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1200976

Original file (MD1200976.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 | ND0801838

Original file (ND0801838.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Board determined the awarded discharge characterization was an appropriate characterization considering the length of service and the UCMJ violations involved, and based on the lack of post service documentation provided an upgrade would be inappropriate.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 Pertinent Regulation/Law A. ” Additional...
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900158

Original file (MD0900158.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Board determined the awarded discharge characterization was appropriate and an upgrade would be inappropriate.For the edification of the Applicant, the NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. 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 :...
NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600462

Original file (ND0600462.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant’s DD Form 214 (Member 4) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 20000207 - 20000816ELS USNR (DEP) 20010921 - 20011118 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 20011119 Date of Discharge: 20050310 Length of Service (years, months, days): Active: 03 0322(Does not...
NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600480

Original file (ND0600480.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The Applicant requests upgrade of his discharge to honorable. The Veterans Administration determines eligibility for post-service benefits, not the Naval Discharge Review Board.
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0902484

Original file (MD0902484.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The General Court Martial Convening Authority affirmed all three reasons for separation, directed a characterization of service of Under Other than Honorable Conditions due to significant negative aspects of conduct, and further directed that the primary basis for separation reporting was Misconduct, Due to a Pattern of Misconduct. The evidence of record does not demonstrate the Applicant was not responsible for his conduct, or that he should not be held accountable for his actions.By a...
NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-01372

Original file (ND04-01372.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

And got my Discharge. I never wanted out in the first place, but after all that I was ready.” Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered: Applicant’s DD Form 214 Fifteen pages from Applicant’s service record PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 990723 - 931004 COG Active: None Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment:...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700554

Similar Decisions