Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700127
Original file (ND0700127.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
ex-MMFR, USN
ND07-00127
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20061108   Characterization Received:
Narrative Reason: COURT MARTIAL Authority: MILPERSMAN 5815-010

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

Decision

 By a vote of the Characterization shall .     
By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall COURT-MARTIAL .

Date: 20 070806       Location: Washington D.C. The Board found that

Discussion

 Issue 1 : (Equity). In response to the Applicant’s clemency request, relevant and material facts stated in a court-martial specification are presumed by the NDRB to be established facts. With respect to a discharge adjudged by a court-martial case, 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 Applicant’s case was considered under the pertinent standards of equity to determine if any factors in this particular case merited clemency. The NDRB found the evidence of record did not contain sufficient mitigating or extenuating factors to offset the seriousness of the offense for which the discharge was awarded. In addition, the reason for discharge, convicted by special court-martial, is most appropriate. After a thorough review of the Applicant’s record, issues submitted, and post service accomplishments, 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.

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 six statemen ts referencing character. The Applicant's efforts need to be more encompassing than those provided. For example, the Applicant could have produced evidence of a verifiable and continuous employment record, documentation of community service, proof of educational pursuits, 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 characterization of discharge.



Summary of Service

Prior Service:
 Inactive: USMCR (DEP)     20020531 - 20021111     Active:         
Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Enlistment: 20021112      Years Contracted : ; Extension:          Date of Discharge: 20050224
Length of Service : 01 Yrs 07 Mths 02 D ys          Lost Time : Days UA: 214 Days Confine d : 28
Education Level:         Age at Enlistment:       AFQT: 37          Highest Rank /Rate : MMFN
Evaluation marks (# of occasions):       Performance: N/A          Behavior: N/A     OTA: N/A
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): NATIONAL DEFENSE SERVICE MEDAL

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

 None Found

Discharge Process

 Date Charge(s) Preferred:                                   20040405
Charge(s) and Specification(s):
         Article 86 : Unauthorized absence from unit 20030823 until apprehended 20040324.
         Court-martial Date:                        20040421
Findings:                                            Guilty of Article(s) 86
Applicant requested Bad Conduct Discharge:      
Sentence:                                            BAD CONDUCT DISCHARGE
         Confinement:                                50 days
         Reduction:                                  E-1
         Forfeiture:                                 $795.00 pay per month for 12 months
Date Applicant to Pre-trial Confinement:                  20040324
Date Applicant from Pre-trial Confinement:                20040421
Date Applicant to Voluntary Appellate Leave:     20040427
Date of Convening Authority action                          20040817
Date Applicant to Involuntary Appellate Leave:        
Date of NC&PB Action:                               NONE
Date Appellate Review Complete:                    20050216
Date BCD ordered executed:                         20050217 SSPCMCO No. 05-0336
Date Applicant Discharged:                         20050224

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. The Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 8, effective
9 Sep 2004 until Present, Article 5815-010, EXECUTING A DISHONORABLE OR BAD CONDUCT DISCHARGE.

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 , Unauthorized Absence.


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 | ND0900521

    Original file (ND0900521.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.While the Board appreciates the fact the Applicantclaims he is now a better person, these claims alone are not sufficient to warrant an...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700537

    Original file (ND0700537.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: HARDSHIPApplicant’s Issues:1.Narrative Reason change due to wife’s illness2. After a thorough review of the Applicant’s record, issues submitted, post service, and the standards of discipline, the Board determined that clemency was not warranted. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700320

    Original file (ND0700320.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 Applicant, the Board found that Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USNR (DEP)NONEActive: 19980305–Unable to determine? Additionally, the NDRB does not have the authority to change a narrative reason for...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700972

    Original file (ND0700972.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Applicant’s Issues:1. The Applicant’s case was considered under the pertinent standards of equity to determine if any factors in this particular case merited clemency. Additionally, the Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0701074

    Original file (ND0701074.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Applicant’s Issues:1. Additionally, the Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities. ” Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records can grant this type of narrative reason change.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700078

    Original file (ND0700078.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a thorough review of the Applicant’s record, issues submitted, and post service accomplishments, the Board determined that clemency was warranted. 19990419: Special Court Martial for violations of UCMJ Articles: 86 (unauthorized absence) from 19990212 until 19990303 (apprehended) Plea: Guilty Finding: Guilty 92 (violation of lawful order) Plea: Guilty Finding: Guilty 134 (Possession of a false military ID card with intend to deceive) Plea: Guilty Finding: Guilty Award: Reduction to...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0601209

    Original file (ND0601209.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. Additionally, the Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1500673

    Original file (ND1500673.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s service record documents a punitive conviction and punishment, as adjudged by a Special Court-Martial on 30 January 2002. ” 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 | 2007_Navy | ND0701042

    Original file (ND0701042.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Discharge Process Charge and Specification: Article 86.Preferred: 19990325Court-martial: 19990419 Findings: Guilty of Article 86Sentence: BCD - Conf 90 days; FOP - $600/month for three months; CA action: 19990716NC&PB Action: NONEAppellate Review Complete: 20001121 BCD ordered executed: 20001129Applicant Discharged: 20001129 Types of Documents Submitted by Applicant and Considered By BoardRelated to Military Service: Service and/or Medical Record:Other Records: Related to Post-Service...

  • 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...