Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700755

Original file (ND0700755.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-FR, USN
ND07-00755

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20070515 Characterization Received: OTHER THAN HONORABLE

Narrative Reason: MISCONDUCT Authority: MILPERSMAN 1910-142

Applicant’s Request:      Characterization change to:
                           Narrative Reason change to:
Applicant’s Issues:       1 C hange Re code to allow reenlistment
                           2. Recruiter failed to provide English training as promised resulting in d iscrimination

Decision

By a vote of the Characterization shall read .
By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall MISCONDUCT .

Date: 20 071220             Location: Washington D.C         R epresentation :

Discussion

Issue 1 . which the Board does not have the authority to grant the relief for which the Applicant petitioned. The Applicant is directed to the Addendum for additional information regarding Reenlistment/RE-codes.

Issue 2 ( ). The American Legion’s Representative contends that Applicant ’s recruiter failed to provide him English language training as promised , resulting in discriminatory treatment of Applicant due to a language barrier. The Applicant is requesting an honorable discharge based on this alleged discrimination so that he can re enter the military . No documentation has been submitted, nor is there evidence in the Applicant’s record to support these allegations of recruiter misrepresentation and discrimination. Nonetheless , a n honorable characterization of service is warranted when the quality of a member’s service generally meets the standard of acceptable conduct and performance for naval personnel, or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization of service would be clearly inappropriate. A discharge under other than honorable conditions is warranted when a member engages in conduct involving one or more acts or omissions that constitute a significant departure from the conduct expected of members of the naval service. The Applicant’s service was marred by two nonjudicial punishments for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Articles 86, 91, 92 and 107 . Violations of Articles 92 and 107 are considered serious offenses for which a punitive discharge is authorized upon conviction at special or general court-martial. 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 .

The following is provided for the edification of the Applicant. Normally, to permit relief, a procedural impropriety or inequity must have occurred during the discharge process for the period of enlistment in question. The Board discovered no impropriety or inequity after a review of Applicant’s case. 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 could 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. As of this time, the Applicant has not provided any post-service documentation to consider mitigating 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 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 ”

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)      20010419 - 20010425              Active:
Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment: 20010426      Years Contracted : ; Extension: Date of Discharge: 20031014
Length of Service : 02 Yrs 05 Mths 14 D ys          Lost Time : Days UA: Days Confine d :
Education Level:         Age at Enlistment:       AFQT: 38          Highest Rank /Rate : FN
Evaluation marks (# of occasions):       Performance: 3.0 ( 2 )       Behavior: 2.5 ( 2 )                  OTA: 3.00
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): SSDR (2), BER, NDSM, NUC

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

20030314:        NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art. 86 – Unauthorized absence; viol UCMJ Art. 91 – Insubordinate conduct toward a petty officer; viol UCMJ Art. 92 – Failure to obey a lawful order or regulation; viol UCMJ Art. 107 – False official statement.
         Awarded - FOP ($ 675.00 ) for ( 2 months) suspended for 6 months ; RIR ( E-2 ) suspended for 6 months ; confinement for 3 days on bread and water .

20030821:        Reduction in pay grade suspended at NJP on 20030314 vacated due to continued misconduct.

20030821:        NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art. 86 – Unauthorized absence (failing to go to muster); viol UCMJ Art. 91 – (2 S pecs) Insubordinate conduct toward a petty officer.
         Awarded - FOP ($ 600.00 ) for ( 2 months); RIR ( E-1 ); Restr iction for ( 45 days); Extra duties ( 45 days).

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:       20031014

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, (NAVPERS 15560C), re-issued October 2002, effective 22 August 2002 until 25 January 2004, Article 1910-142 [formerly 3630605], 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 s of the UCMJ, Article 92 and 107.

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 | 2007_Navy | ND0700677

Original file (ND0700677.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

No other narrative reason for separation or characterization could more clearly describe why the Applicant was discharged. 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: USNR (DEP) 20000629 - 20010121 Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20010122Years...
NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700784

Original file (ND0700784.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 19890607 Years Contracted: ; Extension: Date of Discharge: 19930218 Length of Service: 03 Yrs 08 Mths 12 Dys Lost Time: Days UA: 48 Days Confined: 25 Education Level: Age at Enlistment: AFQT: 59 Highest Rank/Rate: STGSN Evaluation marks (# of occasions): Performance: 3.2(4) Behavior: 3.3(4) OTA: 3.40 (4.0 scale) Awards and Decorations (per DD 214): NDSM Medical/Service Record Entries Related to Characterization of Service or Basis for...
NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700541

Original file (ND0700541.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant’s summary of service clearly documents the Applicants misconduct resulting in a civilian conviction and four nonjudicial punishments for violations of UCMJ Articles 86 (unauthorized absence, four specifications), 92 (failure to obey), 107 (false official statement, two specifications) and 128 (assault). The Board determined that the documentation provided by the Applicant did not mitigate the misconduct which resulted in the Applicant’s discharge and the characterization of...
NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700214

Original file (ND0700214.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant’s service was marred by four nonjudicial punishments and two retention warning for violations of UCMJ Articles 86 (unauthorized absence, 6 specifications), 87 (missing movement), 90 (willfully disobeying a superior commissioned officer), 91 (insubordinate conduct, 2 specifications), 92 (failure to obey, 3 specifications), 107 (false official statements), 111 (drunk operation of a motor vehicle), 112 (drunk on watch), and 134 (disorderly conduct and communicating a threat). ...
NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700956

Original file (ND0700956.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 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 ” The NDRB will recommend to the Commander, Navy Personnel Command, that the DD 214 be corrected as appropriate. ...
NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700405

Original file (ND0700405.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Applicant’s Issues:1. 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 . ” 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...
USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0800800

Original file (MD0800800.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

6105 Counseling: 20050718: For Misconduct, Reckless Driving 20060304: Violations of Article 92, Failure to Obey a Lawful Order; Art 113, Misbehavior of a Sentinel 20060414: Violations of Articles 91, Insubordinate Conduct; Art 107, False Official Statement 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700338

Original file (ND0700338.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Medical/Service Record Entries Related to Characterization of Service or Basis for Discharge 19941015 Applicant to unauthorized absence this date.19941025: Applicant from unauthorized absence this date (10 days/surrendered).19941127: NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art. Discharge Process Date Notified: Reason for Discharge:Least Favorable Characterization: Date Applicant Responded to Notification: Date Applicant Discharged: 19991001 Types of Documents Submitted by Applicant and Considered By BoardRelated...
USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700965

Original file (MD0700965.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant’s service was marred bythreeretention warnings, two nonjudicial punishments (NJP), and a Summary Courts-Martial for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), Article 90 (Willfully disobeying a superior commissioned officer), Article 92 (Willfully disobeying a lawful order), Article 107 (False official statement), and Article 134 (Restriction Breaking) and Article 134 (Adultery). After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s...
NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700131

Original file (ND0700131.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Discharge Improper2. The Board determined that the documentation provided by the Applicant did not mitigate the misconduct that resulted in the characterization of discharge. With respect to a discharge adjudged by a court-martial, the action of the NDRB is restricted to upgrades based on clemency.

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700755

Similar Decisions