Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800121

Original file (ND0800121.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-PHAN, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20071030

Characterization of Service Received:

Narrative Reason for Discharge:
Authority for Discharge: MILPERSMAN

Applicant’s Request:     Characterization change to:
                           Narrative Reason change:

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive: US N R (DEP)      19980630 - 19991004
Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment: 19991005      Period of enlistment : 4 Years + 30 months e xtension      Date of Discharge: 20050715
Length of Service : Y rs Mths 04 D ys      Education Level: NA       Age at Enlistment: 20     AFQT: NA
Highest Rank /Rate : PH3    Evaluation marks: Performance: 3.7 ( 7 )    Behavior: 2.7 ( 7 )         OTA: 3.39 (7)
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): Rifle , , and

Periods of UA /C ONF : 20000106 – 20000113, 20000125 – 20000214, 20000217 – 20000301, 20000303 – 20000313, and 20000712 – 20000813 ( 82 days)

NJPs :     20000317 : Art icle 86 (unauthorized absence, 5 specifications) . Awarded - , , , and ; Susp - (vacated) .
         20000428: No further info found in record.
         20000825 : Art icle 86 (unauthorized absence) and 87 (missing movement) . Awarded - , , and
         20000908: No further info found in record.
         20050630: Article 86 (unauthorized absence, 3 specifications). Awarded – FOP and RIR; Susp - FOP

Types of Documents Submitted

Related 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 Representat ion :              From Member of Congress:
Other Documentation (Describe)

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB)
DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT

Applicant’s Issues

1. Education benefits to better life for children.
2. Threatened that if I did not accept separation agreement would be placed on restriction which was unacceptable because of no child care.

Decision

Date: 20 08 0221 Location: Washington D.C R epresentation :

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall MISCONDUCT - PATTERN OF 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. The Applicant is directed to the Addendum regarding .

Issue 2 ( ): Regulations permit relief on equitable grounds if the Applicant’s discharge is inconsistent with the standards of discipline of the naval service. N othing indicates that the Applicant’s discharge was in any way inconsistent with the standards of discipline in the United States Navy. A other than honorable characterization of service 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 five nonjudicial punishment s f or violations of UCMJ Article 86 (unauthorized absence , a minimum of 9 specifications ) and 87 (missing movement) . These Nonjudicial punishments form the basis for the Applicants administrative discharge based on a pattern of misconduct which is defined as two or more nonjudicial punishments during the same enlistment. For the information of the Applicant, v iolations of UCMJ Article s 86 and 87 carry a penalty of a dishonorable discharge and up to 2 year s of imprisonment for each specification if adjudicated by a court martial. The Applicant’s conduct reflects his willful failure to meet the requirements of his contract with the U.S. Navy and falls far short of that required for an upgrade in his characterization of service.

In reviewing discharges, the Board presume s regularity in the conduct of g overnment al affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence ( to include evidence submitted by the Applicant ) to rebut the presumption . After a thorough review of the available evidence to include the Applicant’s s ummary of s ervice, m edical and s ervice r ecord e ntries, d ischarge p rocess and evid ence submitted by the Applicant the Board found that

Pertinent Regulation/Law

A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 11, effective 26 April 2005 until Present, 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 s of the UCMJ, Article s 86 and 87 .

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 | 2009_Navy | ND0901331

Original file (ND0901331.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

Types of Documents Submitted/reviewed Related to Military Service: DD 214: Service/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 Congress member: Other Documentation: DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800440

Original file (ND0800440.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 | ND0800868

Original file (ND0800868.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant is claiming family issues were a contributing factor in his misconduct.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. 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,...
USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600970

Original file (MD0600970.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Equity – Post Service Summary of Service:Prior Service: Inactive: USMCR (DEP) 20020711 - 20030707Active: None Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20030708Years Contracted:; Date of Discharge: 20040419 Length of Service: 00Yrs 09 Mos 09 Days Does not exclude lost time, if any. Time Lost During This Period: 287Education Level: Age at this Enlistment: AFQT: 43MOS:9900Highest Rate/Rank:PvtPerformance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):Proficiency / Conduct: N/A Extracted...
NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700633

Original file (ND0700633.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

While the Applicant’s reason for requesting a hardship discharge may be honorable the characterization of service is a determination of the quality of service given by the member during his enlistment. Discharge Process Separation Authority (date): Commanding Officer, USS HAWES (FFG 53)Reason for discharge directed: Convenience of the government - Hardship Characterization directed: Date Applicant Discharged: 20020531 Types of Documents Submitted by Applicant and Considered By BoardRelated...
NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700198

Original file (ND0700198.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

After a thorough review of the Applicant’s record, issue submitted, and post service accomplishments, the Board determined that the Applicant’s diagnosis did not provide grounds for misconduct, clemency was not warranted and that the sentence awarded the Applicant at his court-martial was appropriate for the offenses he committed. Additionally, the Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities. Whenever a member is being...
NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0601063

Original file (ND0601063.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Board found no indication in the record that the Applicant was inequitably or improperly denied treatment for psychiatric problems nor has the Applicant produced any evidence to support that contention. After a thorough review of the Applicant’s record, documents provided, and issues submitted, the Board determined that clemency was not warranted and that the sentence awarded the Applicant at his court-martial was appropriate for the offenses he committed. If a former member has been...
NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700974

Original file (ND0700974.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

From Representation: From Member of Congress: Other Documentation (Describe) DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. After ensuring proper processing in accordance with MILPERSMAN 1910-142 the discharge authority directed the Applicant’s discharge under other than honorable conditions. The Board determined that the documentation provided by the Applicant did not mitigate the misconduct which resulted in the...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800672

Original file (ND0800672.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The member’s command did not seek a punitive discharge in this case but chose an administrative discharge instead.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 Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the...
NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0701247

Original file (ND0701247.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

” 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. If a former member has been discharged for more than 15 years, has already been granted 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,...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800121

Similar Decisions