Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700159
Original file (ND0700159.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
ex-QM3, USN
ND07-00159
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20061117   Characterization Received:
Narrative Reason: MISCONDUCT (SERIOUS OFFENSE) Authority: MILPERSMAN 1910-142

 Applicant’s Request:      Characterization change to:
                           Narrative Reason change to:
Applicant’s Issues:       1. Reenlistment opportunities
                           2. VA benefits
                           3. Government Employment
                           4. One time mistake
                            5. Discharge Unfair

Decision

 By a vote of the Characterization shall .     
By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall MISCONDUCT (SERIOUS OFFENSE) .

Date: 20 0709 12      Location: Washington D.C. The Board found that

Discussion

 Issue s 1 - 3 : 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 s 4 - 5 : ( ). T he Board reviews the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge individually, on a case-by-case basis. If such a review reveals an impropriety or inequity, relief is in order. Regulations permit relief on equitable grounds if the Applicant’s discharge is inconsistent with standards of discipline of the Naval service. There is credible evidence in the record that the Applicant committed a serious offense. The evidence of record does not demonstrate that the Applicant was not responsible for h is conduct or that he should not be held accountable for h is actions. When a Sailor ’s service has been honest and faithful, it is appropriate to characterize that service under honorable conditions. A under other than honorable conditions discharge 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. C ertain serious offenses, even though isolated, warrant separation from the Naval service in order to maintain proper order and discipline. The Applicant’s service was marred by charges preferred to a Summary Court-Martial finding for a violatio n of UCMJ Articles 81 and 121. V iolation of Article s 1 21 (Larceny) and Article 81 ( Conspire to commit an offense under the UCMJ ) are considered serious offense s for which a punitive discharge is authorized if adjudged by a Special or General Courts Martial. An upgrade to honorable would be inappropriate .
Summary of Service

Prior Service:
 Inactive: US N R (DEP)      19990526 - 19990705              Active:          19990706 - 20021123
Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Enlistment: 20021124               Years Contracted :                 Date of Discharge: 20060201
Length of Service : 03 Yrs 02 Mths 08 D ys          Lost Time : Days UA: Days Confine d :
Education Level:         Age at Enlistment:       AFQT: 61          Highest Rank /Rate : QM2
Evaluation marks (# of occasions):       Performance: 4.0 ( 5 )       Behavior: 3.8 ( 5 )          OTA: 3.94
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): NATIONAL DEFENSE SERVICE MEDAL, GLOBAL WAR ON TERRORISM SERVICE MEDAL, SEA SERVICE DEPLOYMENT RIBBON(2), NAVY "E" RIBBON


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

 20051220 :         SCM -- Viol UCMJ Art. 81 - Conspire to commit an offense under the UCMJ, Art. 121 - Steal merchandise of a value of about $2,131.99, the property of the Navy Exchange.
         Awarded - RIR (E-4).
Discharge Process

 Date Notified:                                       20051221
Reason for Discharge:     -
Least Favorable Characterization:       

Date Applicant Responded to Notification:                  20051221
Rights Elected at Notification:
         Consult with Counsel                      
         Obtain Copies of Documents               
         Submit Statement(s) (date)                         ( 20051221 )
          Administrative Board                       
         GCMCA review                               

Commanding Officer Recommendation (date):        ( 20051223 )
Separation Authority (date):     COMMANDER, NAVY REGION, MID-ATLANTIC ( 20051228 )
 Reason for discharge directed:  -
Characterization directed:     
Date Applicant Discharged:       20060201

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) Letter to United States Senator
 Letter to the Vice President of the United States

Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 11, effective 26 April 2005 until Present, Article 1910-142, SEPARATION BY 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 s 81 and 121 .

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 | ND0900295

    Original file (ND0900295.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Record of service. 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 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700557

    Original file (ND0700557.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s conduct during the current period of service, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service was marred by one nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) Article 81 (Conspire to make a false official statement), Article 107 (False official statement), and Article 121 (Larceny). ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700249

    Original file (ND0700249.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Charge VI: violation of the UCMJ, Article 134 (15 Specs) Specification 1: Solicited AO2 V_ to wrongfully wear NMCAM Medal. 20030131: DD Form 214: Applicant discharged this date by reason of misconduct due to commission of serious offense with a characterization of service as under other than honorable conditions. The Board did so.]

  • USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1300947

    Original file (MD1300947.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 the narrative reason for separation shall remain .The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing for a period of fifteen years from the date of discharge. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1401236

    Original file (ND1401236.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    An Administrative Board convened and, after hearing all the testimony and evidence in the Applicant’s case, determined by a 3-0 vote that the Applicant should be discharged from the Navy with an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500648

    Original file (ND0500648.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). Issues submitted by Applicant’s counsel/representative (Civilian Counsel):“Whether the characterization of discharge was warranted given the circumstances of the offense charge and considering the entire service member’s exemplary record during the period of his enlistment. The Applicant’s violations of Articles 107, 108 and 121 are...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801718

    Original file (ND0801718.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board determined the awarded discharge characterization was appropriate and an upgrade based on the fact the Applicant feels his actions were unintentional would be inappropriate.Issue 2: The Applicant is asking for help in locating a binder used by his defense attorney which documented the Applicant’s Naval service. It is recommended the Applicant contact his last command or his defense attorney for information on disposition of his binder.After a thorough review of the available...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700103

    Original file (MD0700103.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USMCR (DEP)20021122 - 20030622Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20030623Years Contracted:; Extension: Date of Discharge:20050622 Length of Service: 02 Yrs 00Mths00 DysLost Time:Days UA: Days Confined: Education Level: Age at Enlistment:AFQT: 57MOS:6672Highest Rank:Proficiency/Conduct marks (# of occasions): N/A/N/AFitness reports: Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):RIFLE MARKSMAN BADGE, SEA SERVICE DEPLOYMENT RIBBON,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00440

    Original file (ND02-00440.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The discharge shall remain: UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910 - 142 (formerly 3630605). After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper and equitable (C and D).Issue 1: The Applicant believes his other than honorable discharge was very severe punishment and he would like an upgrade to his discharge so he can continue his Navy career...

  • 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...