Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600742
Original file (ND0600742.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
ex-FA, USN
ND06-00742
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20060508   Characterization Received:
Narrative Reason: MISCONDUCT - COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE Authority: MILPERSMAN 3630600

 Applicant’s Request:      Characterization change to: or general (under honorable conditions )
                           Narrative Reason change to:
Applicant’s Issues:       1. Did not commit the misconduct for which discharged
                           2. Post-service conduct

Decision

 By a vote of the Characterization shall .     
By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall MISCONDUCT .
Date: 20 071011            Location: Washington D.C.        Representative: aMERICAN lEGION  
Discussion

Issue 1 ( ). There is credible evidence in the record to support the conclusion that the Applicant’s discharge was based in fact. The Board carefully reviewed the evidence, and noted that the Applicant fully contested the evidence of his unauthorized absence at his discharge board. The Board was satisfied that the Applicant’s misconduct was factually based and supported by a preponderance of the evidence , that separation under the circumstances was warranted, and that the characterization of service was appropriate .

Issue 2 ( ). The Applicant asserts that he has become a productive citizen. Normally, to permit relief, a procedural impropriety or inequity must have occurred during the discharge process for the period of enlistment in question. The Board discovered no impropriety or inequity after a review of Applicant’s case. 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 in order to corroborate claims of good post-service conduct 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 that

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
 Inactive: US N R (DEP)      19900330 - 19900718              Active:         
Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Enlistment: 19900719      Years Contracted : ; Extension:                  Date of Discharge: 19930623
Length of Service : 02 Yrs 11 Mths 05 D ys          Lost Time : Days UA: 60 Days Confine d :
Education Level:         Age at Enlistment:       AFQT: 27          Highest Rank /Rate : FN
Evaluation marks (# of occasions):       Performance: 3.2 ( 3 )       Behavior: 3.1 ( 3 )                  OTA: 3.40        (4.0 scale)
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): Navy Unit Commendation, Combat Action Ribbon, Sea Service Deployment Ribbon, Southwest Asia Service Medal(2), National Defense Service Medal, Kuwaiti Liberation Medal

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

 19920527:        Applicant transferred from USS IWO JIMA (LPH 2) .

19920529:        Civil conviction: Circuit Court of City of Norfolk, guilty of trespassing. Nolle proseque entered on charge of burglary. Sentence: Unsupervised probation for 1 year, court costs, $100 . 0 0 restitution to victim.

 19920720:        Applicant to unauthorized absence from USS IWO JIMA (LPH 2) this date.

 19920727:        Applicant attached to Naval Amphibious Base, Little Creek, Norfolk as transient.
19920820:        Applicant declared deserter. DD Form 553 promulgated by USS IWO JIMA (LPH 2).

19920918:        Applicant from unauthorized absence at 0915 this date, at PSD Naval Station, Norfolk.

19920923:        PersDet Little Creek advised USS IWO JIMA (LPH 2) via naval message of Applicant’s presence onboard.
19921028:        Applicant transferred from Naval Amphibious Base, Little Creek and joined to USS IWO JIMA (LPH 2).

19921028 :        NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art. 86 – Unauthorized absence from TAD unit from 19920720 – 19920918 .
         Awarded - FOP ( $ 440.00 ) for ( 2 months); RIR ( E-2 ); Restr for ( 60 days).
Discharge Process

 Date Notified:                                       19921106
Reason for Discharge:     -
Least Favorable Characterization:       

Date Applicant Responded to Notification:                  19930107
Rights Elected at Notification:
         Consult with Counsel                      
         Obtain Copies of Documents               
         Submit Statement(s) (date)                         ( None found in record )
          Administrative Board                       

Administrative Board Date :       19930514
Findings, by preponderance of the evidence:     BY .
          BY SEPARATION WARRANTED.
Recommendation on Separation:   BY      
Recommendation on Characterization:     BY

Commanding Officer Recommendation (date):        ( 19930525 )

Separation Authority (date):     BUPERS ( 19930617 )
 Reason for discharge directed:  -
Characterization directed:     
Date Applicant Discharged:       19930623

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 Article (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 5, Effective 05 Mar 93 Until 21 Jul 94, Article 3630600, Separation of Enlisted Personnel b Reason of Misconduct - Commission of a Serious Offense.

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 86 , Absence without leave (for greater than 30 days) .
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 | 2002_Navy | ND02-00656

    Original file (ND02-00656.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00656 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020411, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. The Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) also advised that the board first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing. Upon reading this, for whoever it may concern, please understand I was young and made very bad decisions please consider my upgrade, because if...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-01023

    Original file (ND02-01023.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-01023 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020711, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. No indication of appeal in the record.920710: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: UA from unit from 920526 to 920615 (20 days/S); violation of UCMJ, Article 87: Missed ship's movement on 920527. The Applicant is reminded that he remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00409

    Original file (ND04-00409.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    No indication of appeal in the record.921022: USS IWO JIMA (LPH 2) notified Applicant of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. At this time, the Applicant has not provided sufficient verifiable documentation of good character and conduct to mitigate his misconduct while on active duty. The names, and votes of the members of the Board are recorded on the original of this document and may be...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600147

    Original file (ND0600147.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Character, Narrative Reason, and Authority of Discharge (at time of issuance):GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT, authority: MILPERSMAN, Article 1910-140 (formerly 3630600). 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 | BCNR | CY2010 | 06366-10

    Original file (06366-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    06366-10 8 September 2010 From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records TO: Secretary of the Navy Subj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD OF FORMER MIM Pectin Ref: (a) 10 U.S.c. His commanding officer then referred this matter to an ADB to determine if Petitioner should be retained in the Navy or involuntarily discharged because of his UA. Accordingly, Petitioner was so discharged on 23 June 1992. h. Since his discharge Petitioner has conducted himself in a law abiding manner.

  • USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1300422

    Original file (MD1300422.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600218

    Original file (ND0600218.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND06-00218 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20051116. The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions) or uncharacterized. The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of discharge.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600520

    Original file (ND0600520.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant also violated Article 91 of the UCMJ, disrespectful in language to a Third Class Petty Officer in the performance of duty. Dismissed.930527: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Specification: On or about 0715, 930506, without authority, fail to go to restricted muster in the hangar bay. Your Commanding Officers Nonjudicial Punishment on board USS TRIPOLI (LPH 10) of 930402, violation of the UCMJ, Article 92, Spec: On or about 920321, fail to obey a lawful order issued by the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00160

    Original file (ND02-00160.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00160 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 011203, requested that the reason for the discharge be changed to erroneous discharge with a RE-1 or 3 code. In the acknowledgement letter to the applicant, he was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing and that the NDRB does not have the authority to change a reenlistment code. Applicant did not object to...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0601166

    Original file (ND0601166.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 By a vote of X-X the Characterization shall By a vote of X-X the Narrative Reason shall Date of Decision: 20071017 Location of Board: Washington D.C. Elements of Discharge: [INVOLUNTARY] Date Notified:19921201Reason for Discharge DUE TO Least Favorable Characterization...