Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700766

Original file (ND0700766.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-AT3, USN
ND07-00766

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20070514 Characterization Received: GENERAL

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

Applicant’s Request:      Characterization change to:
                           Narrative Reason change to:
Applicant’s Issues:       1. Seeking upgrade for VA Benefits
                           2. Discharge based on one Page 13
                           3. Post service

Decision

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall SECRETARIAL AUTHORITY .

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 Service Benefits .

Issue 2 ( ). The Applicant contends that his administrative separation was based on a page 13 given to him almost four years earlier, in May of 2001 . Pursuant to MILPERSMAN 1910-140 members may be separated when during their current enlistment they have at least two nonjudical punishments (NJP), court-martials, civil convictions or a combination thereof and a page 13 retention warning. The record indicates that the Applicant was administratively processed and subsequently discharged for a pattern of misconduct even though he d id not meet the criteria for processing in that he d id not have two or more NJP’s, court-martial or civil convictions or a combination thereof . The transmittal letter submitted by the o fficer in charge of Aircraft Intermediate Maintenance Detachment, Jacksonville, Florida on 20050105 indicates that Applicant had no involvement with civilian authorities and only one OIC’s Mast on 20041209 that was refused by the member. Based on the evidence contained in the record the Board has determined that the command erroneously discharged the Applicant for a pattern of misconduct and that such error was not prejudicial to him since the Applicant could have been processed under MILPERSMAN 1910-142, for commission of a serious offense, in violation of the UCMJ, Art. 92 (1), Failure to obey a lawful order. T he Board recommend s that the narrative reason be changed to S ecretarial A uthority . However, t here is no recommendation to change the characterization based on the misconduct that resulted in the Applicant’s discharge .

Issue 3 ( ). The Applicant further contends that since his discharge in 2005 he obtained full-time employment and has been attending college full - time as well . 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 th at even though Applicant was erroneously processed for pattern of misconduct instead of commission of a serious offense , the discharge itself was proper.
Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive: US N R (DEP)      20000911 - 20000928              Active:
Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment: 20000929      Years Contracted : ; Extension: Date of Discharge: 20050214
Length of Service : 04 Yrs 04 Mths 16 D ys          Lost Time : Days UA: Days Confine d :
Education Level:         Age at Enlistment:       AFQT: 80          Highest Rank /Rate : AT3
Evaluation marks (# of occasions):       Performance: 3.5 ( 4 )       Behavior: 2.2 ( 4 )                  OTA: 3.10
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): NDSM, SSDR, GCA

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

20010530:        Retention Warning for violation of the UCMJ. Art(s) 86, 92x3 , Art 86: UA from PT 0500-0720 on 20010305. Art 92-Failure to be inspection ready on 20010517; incomplete homework on 20010405; wearing tongue ring in uniform at school .

20041209:        OIC Mast held for violation of Article 92 – Failure to obey order or regulation. NJP refused by member.

Discharge Process

Date Notified:                                       20040112
Reason for Discharge:     -

Least Favorable Characterization:

Date Applicant Responded to Notification:                  20050121
Rights Elected at Notification:
         Consult with Counsel
         Obtain Copies of Documents
         Submit Statement(s) (date)
         Administrative Board
         GCMCA review

Commanding Officer Recommendation (date):        ( 20050125 )
Separation Authority (date):     COMMANDER, SEA CONTROL WING, U. S. ATLANTIC FLEET. ( 20050128 )
Reason for discharge directed: -
Characterization directed:
Date Applicant Discharged:       20050214

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 Aug 2002 until 25 April 2005, 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 .

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 | 2008_Navy | ND0801322

Original file (ND0801322.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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. 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 ADDENDUM: Information...
NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0701105

Original file (ND0701105.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Date: 20080117Location:Washington D.C Representation: Discussion : 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. There is credible evidence in the record that the Applicant established a pattern of misconduct. Discharge Process Date Notified: 20050323Reason for Discharge:--Least Favorable Characterization: Date Applicant Responded to Notification:20050323Rights...
NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700311

Original file (ND0700311.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. Recommendation on Separation: BY Recommendation on Characterization: BY Commanding Officer Recommendation...
NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700221

Original file (ND0700221.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Board determined that the documentation provided by the Applicant did not mitigate the misconduct which resulted in the Applicant’s discharge and characterization of his service. After a thorough review of the available evidence, including 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)20020043 - 20020514Active: Period of Service...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800420

Original file (ND0800420.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Martial Problems Decision Date: 20080404Location: Washington D.C Representation: By a vote of the Characterization shall .By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall MISCONDUCT.Discussion : 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. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800347

Original file (ND0800347.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 | 2008_Navy | ND0801318

Original file (ND0801318.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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. 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 ADDENDUM: Information...
NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700162

Original file (ND0700162.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 and testimony submitted by the Applicant, the Board found that although , Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USNR (DEP)NONEActive: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 19890828Years Contracted: (TAR, 4 year AD commitment);Date of Discharge:19930125 Length of Service: 03 Yrs 04Mths25 DysLost Time:Days UA:...
NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0701234

Original file (ND0701234.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 | 2006_Navy | ND0601016

Original file (ND0601016.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-AN, USNND06-01016Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request: Application Received: 20060728Narrative Reason for Separation: Character of Service:Discharge Authority: MILPERSMAN1910-122Last Duty Assignment/Command at Discharge: VAQRON ONE THREE FOUR AT NAS WHIDBEY ISLAND WAApplicant’s Request:Narrative Reason change to:medical conditionCharacterization change to:Review Requested:Representation: Decision: Date of Decision:20070621Location of Board: Washington D.C.Complete Service...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700766

Similar Decisions