Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700915

Original file (ND0700915.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-GMSA, USN
ND07-00915

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20070626 Characterization Received:

Narrative Reason: MISCONDUCT Authority: MILPERSMAN 1910-140

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

Decision

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

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

Discussion

Issue 1: ( ). 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 two nonjudicial punishments (NJP) for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) Article 80 (Attempt to jump ship), Article 91 (Disrespect towards a petty officer), Article 95 (Resist arrest), Article 134 (Drunk and disorderly) and Article 134 (Indecent exposure) Violation of UCMJ Article s 95 and 134 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 2: (Equity). 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 a letter documenting your nomination to the National Dean ’s List as 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, a verifiable employment record, 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)      20000926 - 20000927              Active:
Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment: 20000928      Years Contracted : ; Extension: Date of Discharge: 20020219
Length of Service : 1 Yrs 4 Mths 22 D ys    Lost Time : Days UA: Days Confine d :
Education Level:         Age at Enlistment:       AFQT: 80          Highest Rank /Rate : GMSN
Evaluation marks (# of occasions):       Performance: 2.6 ( 3 )       Behavior: 2.0 ( 3 )          OTA: 2.3
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): Pistol SS

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

20011004 :        NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art. 80 – Attempt to jump ship, Art. 91 – Disrespectful language towards a PO1, Art. 95 – Resist arrest, Art. 134 – Drunk and disorderly .
         Awarded - FOP ($ 607.00 ) for (1 months) susp for 6 months ; RIR (paygrade); Restr for (30 days); Extra duties (30 days).

20011004 :        Retention Warning for Art 80 , Art 91, Art 95 and Art 134 .

20011025:        Adverse Performance Evaluation

20011214:        Alcohol Treatment Department: Applicant noncompliant with Treatment Regimen due to his immature behavior. Patient refuses to sign

20020209:        NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art. 95 – Resist Apprehension, Art. 134 – Drunk and disorderly, Art. 134 – Indecent Exposure
         Awarded - FOP ($619.00) for (2 months); RIR (E-2); Restr for (45 days); Extra duties (45 days).

20020211:        Email from EMC Bean to LN1 Russell: Recent incident of Drunk and disorderly comes after failure to complete appropriate alcohol treatment due to immaturity and being disruptive in class.

Discharge Process

Date Notified:                                       20020202
Reason for Discharge:     -
         -

Least Favorable Characterization:

Date Applicant Responded to Notification:                  20020209
Rights Elected at Notification:
         Consult with Counsel
         Obtain Copies of Documents
         Submit Statement(s) (date)
         Administrative Board
         GCMCA review

Commanding Officer Recommendation (date):        (20020215)
Separation Authority (date):     COMNAVSURFGRU ( 20020215 )
Reason for discharge directed: -
Characterization directed:
Date Applicant Discharged:       20020219

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) Nomination to the National Dean's List

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 95 and 134.

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

USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0800743

Original file (MD0800743.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 | ND0801340

Original file (ND0801340.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant should be aware completion of these items alone does not guarantee an upgrade from 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.Besides the personal statement provided on the DD Form-293, the Applicant failed to provide any additional statements and evidence of in-service and post service accomplishments. The Board determined based on...
USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801914

Original file (MD0801914.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Board determined the awarded discharge characterization was appropriate for the numerous NJP’s and UCMJ violations involved and an upgrade based on youth and immaturity 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 ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant Complaint Procedures : If you believe that the decision in your case...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900642

Original file (ND0900642.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301579

Original file (ND1301579.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Types of Documents Submitted/reviewedRelated 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: Other Documentation: Additional Statements:From Applicant: From/To Representation:From/ToCongress member: Pertinent Regulation/Law A. Relief denied.Summary: After...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900025

Original file (ND0900025.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant has requested an upgrade in his discharge characterization to “General (Under Honorable Conditions)” to better his life. The Board determined the characterization of service received, “Under Other Than Honorable Conditions”, was an appropriate characterization considering the time served and the numerous and varied UCMJ violations involved, and based on the lack post service documentation provided an upgrade would be inappropriate.Should the Applicant obtain additional...
NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200993

Original file (ND1200993.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700785

Original file (ND0700785.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: “ PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT ” The NDRB will recommend to the Commander, Navy Personnel Command, that the DD 214 be corrected as appropriate. Summary of...
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100124

Original file (ND1100124.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Automatic upgrades are not given.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entriesand the administrative separation 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...
USMC | DRB | 2000_Marine | MD00-00936

Original file (MD00-00936.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper and equitable (D and E).In the applicant’s issue 1, the Board found that although the applicant may have received letters of recommendation, the applicant’s misconduct outweighed these good aspects of service. The Board will not grant relief on the basis of this issue.In response to the applicant’s issues 5 and 6, the Board found that the...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700915

Similar Decisions