ex-UTCA, USN

                  Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20090303
Characterization of Service Received:
Narrative Reason for Discharge:
Authority for Discharge:  MILPERSMAN

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

                             Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive:   USNR (DEP) 19960430 - 19961104   Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment:  19961105     Age at Enlistment:
Period of Enlistment:   Years   Extension
Date of Discharge:  20000313 Highest Rank/Rate:  UTCN
Length of Service:   Year(s)     Month(s)   09 Day(s)
Education Level:       AFQT:  33
Evaluation Marks:      Performance:  3.0 (8) Behavior:  1.9 (8)     OTA:
2.73

Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):    Rifle  (2)  (2)

Periods of UA/CONF:

NJP:

    - 19980319:  Article 92 (Failure to obey a lawful order - underage
             drinking)
      Awarded:   Suspended:


    - 19990514:  Article 86 (Failure to go to appointed place of duty at
             prescribed time)
      Awarded:     Suspended:


    - 19991216:  Article 86 (Failure to go to appointed place of duty at
             prescribed time)
      Awarded:     Suspended:      Vacate suspension 20000103

SCM:

    - 20000113:  Article 81 (Conspiracy to violate order)
      Article 92 (Failure to obey a lawful order)
      Sentence:  (20000113-20000206 (24 Days))

SPCM:

CC:


    - 19980426:  Offense:  DUI  [Extracted from Commanding Officer’s letter
             dated 20000127.]
       Sentence:  Fine $1,172.00 and $42.00 for property damage.


Retention Warning Counseling:

    - 19980326:  For your misconduct as evidenced by your NJP on 19980319.

            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.


                    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 DOCUMENT

                             Applicant’s Issues

1. Applicant is requesting an upgrade for reenlistment purposes.
2. Applicant claims to have become a better person.
                                  Decision

Date:  20090625        Location:  Washington D.C.  Representation:

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

                                 Discussion

:  The Applicant is requesting an upgrade in the characterization of
service because he would like to rejoin the Seabees.  The Board does not
have has authority to grant the relief on this matter.  The Applicant is
directed to the Addendum, specifically the paragraph concerning , for
additional information regarding how to seek relief on this Issue.

:  ()  . The Applicant contends that his discharge should be upgraded
because, at the time of discharge, he was “just a stupid kid" and is now a
better person who loves his country.  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 NDRB, under its responsibility to examine
the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge, is authorized to
change the character of service and/or the reason for discharge if such
change is warranted.

When the quality of a member’s service has met the standards of acceptable
conduct and performance of duty for military personnel, it is appropriate
to characterize that service under Honorable conditions.  A General (Under
Honorable Conditions) is appropriate if the member’s service has been
honest and faithful, but significant negative aspects of the member’s
conduct or performance outweighs positive aspects of the member’s military
record.  The Applicant’s service record was marred by one retention
warning; three non-judicial punishments (NJPs) for violations of Uniform
Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) Article 86 (UA, failure to go to appointed
place of duty – 2 specifications), Article 92 (failure to obey a lawful
order or regulation – underage drinking); and one summary court-martial
(SCM) for violations of Article 81 (conspiracy to violate an order of the
commanding officer) and Article 92 (failure to obey a lawful order of the
commanding officer), thus substantiating the pattern of misconduct for
which he was administratively separated.  After reviewing the evidence of
record, the Board determined an upgrade was not warranted based on the
frequency and seriousness of the offenses committed. Therefore, relief is
denied.





For the Applicant’s edification, the NDRB is authorized to consider
outstanding post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge,
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.  As noted in previous correspondence from the NDRB
to the Applicant, proof of any post-service accomplishments must be
provided to the Board in order for the Applicant to claim post-service
conduct and behavior as a reason to upgrade his discharge to Honorable.
Evidence of continuing educational pursuits, employment record,
documentation of community service, certification of non-involvement with
civil authorities and credible evidence of a substance-free lifestyle are
examples of verifiable documentation that should have been provided to
receive consideration for relief based on post-service conduct.  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.

The Applicant failed to provide any documentary evidence on his behalf for
post-service consideration.  Without post-service documentary evidence, the
Board determined the awarded characterization of service shall remain Under
Other Than Honorable Conditions.

After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the
Applicant’s summary of service,  record entries, and discharge process, the
Board found

                          Pertinent Regulation/Law

A.  Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 18, effective
12 December 1997 until 21 August 2002, 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.

                  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, provided 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 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, 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.

Employment/Educational Opportunities:  The NDRB has no authority to upgrade
a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational
opportunities.  Regulations limit the NDRB’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 NDRB 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 or is referred to a court martial 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 or for any basis wherein an Other Than Honorable Discharge is
authorized, 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 other medical related reasons.  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 NDRB 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 special 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.  The
NDRB does not have the jurisdictional authority to review a discharge or
dismissal resulting from a general court-martial.

Board Membership:  The names and votes of the members of the NDRB 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