Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101798

Original file (ND1101798.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-SN, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20110722

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:         US N R (DEP)        19990430 - 19990825      Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 19990826     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20011116      Highest Rank/Rate: SN
Length of Service: Y ear( s ) M onth( s ) 22 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 86
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 2.0 ( 2 )      Behavior: 1.7 ( 3 )        OTA: 2.28

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):

Periods of C ONF :

NJP :

- 20000324 :      Article (Absence without leave)
         Article (Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, noncommissioned officer , and petty officer)
         Article (Failure to obey order or regulation)
         Awarded: Suspended:

- 20010808 :      Article (Absence without leave)
         Article (Assaulting or willfully disobeying superior commissioned officer)
         Article (Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, noncommissioned officer , and petty officer)
         Awarded : CCU Susp ended:

- 20011018 :      Article (Absence without leave)
         Article (Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, noncommissioned officer , and petty officer)
         Article (Failure to obey order or regulation)
         Article (General Article, underage drinking)
         Awarded : Susp ended:

S CM :    SPCM:    C C :

Retention Warning Counseling : 1

         - 20010801 :      F or misconduct and violation of UCMJ A rticles 86, 90, 91 ( Dated 20010801 but not signed until                      20011001 )

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:          Rehabilitation/Treatment:                  Criminal Records:
         Personal Documentation :          Community Service:                References:
         Department of VA letter:                  Oth er Documentation:
                  Additional Statements :
         From Applicant:          From /To Representation:          From /To Congress m ember :

Pertinent Regulation/Law

A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 22, effective 15 December 1998 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 .

C . Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 31, effective 25 January 2001 until
21 August 2002, Article 1910-142, SEPARATION BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT - COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE (Article s 90, 91 , and 92).

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

Applicant’s Issues

1 . The Applicant contends she was improperly separated for a Pattern of Misconduct .

Decision

Date : 20 1 2 0906 Location: Washington D.C . R epresentation :

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

Discussion

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 the reason for discharg e if such change is warranted. In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of g overnment al affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant. T he Board did complete a thorough review of the circumstances that led to discharge and the discharge process to ensure discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety. The Applicant’s record of service included NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13) warning and for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 86 ( Absence without leave , 3 specifications ), Article 90 (Assaulting or willfully disobeying superior commissioned officer ) , Article 91 ( Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, noncommissioned officer , and petty officer , 3 specifications ), Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation , 2 specifications ) , and Article 134 (General Article, underage drinking ) . When notified of administrative separation processing for Misconduct (Pattern of Misconduct) and Misconduct (Commission of a Serious Offense) using the procedure, the Applicant waived rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request an administrative board .

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends she was improperly separated for a Pattern of Misconduct. The Applicant contends her discharge violated Naval Military Personnel Manual (MILPERSMAN) Article 1910-140 ( Pattern of Misconduct ) , because her NAVPERS 1070/613 Retention Wa rning Counseling signed 1 October 2001 was backdated to 1 August 2001 prior to her last NJP. As a result, she contends that she did not violate a Page 13 retention warning and so should not have been discharged for a Pattern of Misconduct. The Applicant is correct. To meet the requirements for separation due to a pattern of misconduct, a NAVPERS 1070/613 must have been violated prior to processing. Although the date of issuance on her 613 is 1 August 2001, her last violation of Article 86 occurred on 29 September 2001 , and the Applicant did not receive and sign the counseling until 1 October 2001.

However, per the MILPERSMAN, when a servicemember is notified of separation processing, the command must notify the servicemember of all applicable reasons for separation. In the specific case of the Applicant, she was notified for separation processing for Misconduct (Pattern of Misconduct) and Misconduct (Commission of a Serious Offense). While it has already been shown that she was not eligible for separation due to a Pattern of Misconduct, she was eligible for separation due to Commission of a Serious Offense by her violation of UCMJ Articles 90, 91, and 92. Per Appendix 12 of the Manual for Courts-Martial, a serious offense is one that could result in a Bad Conduct or Dishonorable Discharge as the result of a Special or General Court-Martial. Her command, however, opted for the more lenient administrative separation process. The NDRB determined that the Narrative Reason for Separation should change to MISCONDUCT to reflect that she was discharged for Commission of a Serious Offense.

Characterization of service at discharge is the recognition of a service member’s performance and conduct during a period of enlistment and is not necessarily dependent upon the narrative reason for separation. An 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 General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge is warranted when the quality of the member’s service has been honest and faithful but significant negative aspects of the member’s conduct or performance of duty outweighed the positive aspects of the member’s service record. An Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge 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.

After a complete review of the Applicant’s service records and with three NJPs for numerous and repeated serious violations of the UCMJ, the NDRB determined that relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service is not warranted. Her discharge was proper and equitable with the exception of the Narrative Reason for Separation, which will change to MISCONDUCT. Relief denied.

Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s s ummary of s ervice, r ecord e ntries, and d ischarge p rocess, the Board found the discharge was equitable and warranted but the narrative reason for separation was improper. Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS but the narrative reason for separation shall change to . The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing for a period of fifteen years from the date of discharge. The Applicant is directed to the Addendum for additional information.

ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant

Complaint Procedures : If you believe 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 : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years of the Applicant’s 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. There are veterans organizations such as the American Legion and the Disabled American Veterans that are willing to provide guidance to former service members in their efforts to obtain a discharge upgrade. If a former member has been discharged for more than 15 years, has already been granted a personal appearance hearing or has otherwise exhausted their opportunities before the NDRB, the Applicant may petition the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR), 701 South Courthouse Road, Suite 1001, Arlington, VA 22204-2490 for further review.

Service Benefits: The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) determines eligibility for post-service benefits, not the NDRB. 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 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 is processed subsequently for an administrative involuntary separation or is referred to a court martial for misconduct, the disability evaluation is suspended 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 BCNR can grant this type of narrative reason change.

Automatic Upgrades - There is no law or regulation that provides for an unfavorable discharge to be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct subsequent to leaving naval service.

Post-Service Conduct : The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. Outstanding post-service conduct, 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, is considered during Board reviews. Documentation to support a post-service conduct upgrade includes, but is not limited to: a verifiable continuous employment record; marriage and children’s birth certificates (if applicable); character witness statements; documentation of community or church service; certification of non-involvement with civil authorities; evidence of financial stability or letters of good standing from banks, credit card companies, or other financial institutions; attendance at or completion of higher education (official transcripts); and documentation of a drug-free lifestyle. 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 accomplishments help demonstrate in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member’s overall character.

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

Similar Decisions

NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900201

Original file (ND0900201.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 accomplishments help demonstrate previous in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member’s overall character.Besides the Applicant DD Form 293, no documentation was provided for further review. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to...
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101668

Original file (ND1101668.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Representation: NONE By a vote of the Characterization shall .By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall .Discussion 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 the reason for discharge if such change is warranted.In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901335

Original file (ND0901335.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1.I was told by my CO and XO that I would receive a medical discharge. The NDRB determined the awarded character of service was warranted and the narrative reason for discharge was appropriate.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, medical and service record entries, and discharge process, the Board found...
NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700615

Original file (ND0700615.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-HN, USN ND07-00615 Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request Application Received: 20070409 Characterization Received: Narrative Reason: MISCONDUCT-COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE Authority: MILPERSMAN 1910-142 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501136

Original file (ND0501136.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION No indication of appeal in the record.930615: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a commission of a serious offense and commission of a pattern of misconduct.930621: Applicant advised of rights and having consulted with counsel, elected to appear before an administrative discharge board, to be represented at administrative discharge board, to submit...
NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201413

Original file (ND1201413.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years of the Applicant’s date of discharge. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities.
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100201

Original file (ND1100201.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends she was told that she would receive an Honorable discharge six months after her separation.2. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years of the Applicant’s date of discharge. Additionally, the NDRB has no...
NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1500280

Original file (ND1500280.rtf) Auto-classification: 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 remain UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS and the narrative reason for separation shall remain MISCONDUCT (SERIOUS OFFENSE). ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the...
NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1401344

Original file (ND1401344.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

I warned her that if she got in trouble again, I was going to take action by submitting a recommendation for administrative separation.” The NDRB found that the Applicant did commit a pattern of misconduct and separation from the Naval service was warranted. 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600939

Original file (ND0600939.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). Decisional Issues Equity: Discharge too harsh for offenses Documentation In addition to the service and medical records, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant’s DD Form 214 (Service 2) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive:...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101798

Similar Decisions