Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700763
Original file (ND0700763.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
ex-BM3, USN
ND07-00763
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20070515   Characterization Received:
Narrative Reason: MISCONDUCT(SERIOUS OFFENSE)    Authority: MILPERSMAN 1910-142

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

Applicant’s Issues:       1. Reenlist or go to school .
                           2. I feel I was wrongly punished for discrimination.


Decision

 By a vote of the Characterization shall .
 By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall MISCONDUCT (SERIOUS OFFENSE) .
Date: 20 080110                      Location: Washington D.C         R epresentation :


Discussion

 : 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 2 ( ): The Applicant contends that h is discharge was inequitable based on discrimination. The government enjoys a presumption of regularity in the conduct of its affairs. The Applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support h is claim . There is no evidence in the record, nor has the Applicant produ ced any evidence, to support his statement . To the contrary in the Applicant’s own statement to the Board he admits violating UCMJ Articles 91, 92 and 86, the violations which resulted in his administrative discharge. Furthermore, he requested in writing to be administratively discharged. E ven if the Applicant could document his claim this would neither amount to a justification nor to a defense for the Applicant’s own misconduct. Each violation of UCMJ Article 91 and 92 constitutes the “co mmission of a serious offense” which forms the basis for the Applicant’s discharge and is punishable by a di shonorable discharge and up to three years of imprisonment for each specification. The record supports the commission of a serious offense for which the Applicant was administratively discharged. T hat se paration was appropriate, and a general (under honorable conditions) characterization of service is warranted . T he Board found the Applicant’s discharge proper and equitable .


Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

 The NDRB did note an administrative error on the original DD Form 214 :

         “ CONTINUOUS ACTIVE SERVICE 99 DEC 28 - 03 OCT 22 ”
        
The NDRB will recommend to the C ommander, Navy Personnel Command, that the DD 214 be corrected as appropriate.





Summary of Service

Prior Service:
 Inactive: US N R (DEP)      19991214 - 19991227              Active: 19991228 - 20031022
Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Enlistment: 20031023               Years Contracted : ;                Date of Discharge: 20060224
Length of Service : 02 Yrs 04 Mths 01 D ys                                     Lost Time :
Education Level:         Age at Enlistment:       AFQT: 31          Highest Rank /Rate : BM2
Evaluation marks (# of occasions):       Performance: 3.7 ( 3 )      Behavior: 4.0 ( 3 )                 OTA: 3.38 (3)
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): EAWS, ESWS, N avy “E” Ribbon (3) , OSR (3), NDSM (2), SSDR (4), GCM, GWOTSM


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

 20031023:        Reenlisted this date for a term of 4 years.
20050505:        Retention Warning for 1 ST PFA failure in a 4 yr period [Extracted from Report and Disposition of Offense in case file].
20051227:        Retention Warning for PFA failure [Extracted from Report and Disposition of Offense in case file].

20060106:        Applicant unauthorized absent from 0600 until 0645.

20060201 :        NJP – Viol ation of UCMJ Art icle 91 (d isrespect ); V iol ation of UCMJ Art icle 92 (fail to obey); V iol ation of UCMJ Art icle 86 (u nauthorized absence ) .
         Awarded - FOP ( $ 1009.00 for 1 month); RIR ( E-4 ).

Discharge Process

 Date Notified:                                       20060206
Reason for Discharge:     -
        
Least Favorable Characterization:       

Date Applicant Responded to Notification:                  20060206
Rights Elected at Notification:
         Consult with Counsel                      
         Obtain Copies of Documents               
         Submit Statement(s) (date)                        
         Administrative Board                       
        
Separation Authority (date):     COMMANDER, SOUTHEAST REGIONAL MAINTENANCE CENTER ( 20060224 )
 Reason for discharge directed:  -
Characterization directed:     
Date Applicant Discharged:       20060224


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, (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 s of UCMJ, Article s 91 and 92 .

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 | 2007_Navy | ND0701027

    Original file (ND0701027.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. 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. With respect to a discharge adjudged by a court-martial, the action of the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700214

    Original file (ND0700214.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s service was marred by four nonjudicial punishments and two retention warning for violations of UCMJ Articles 86 (unauthorized absence, 6 specifications), 87 (missing movement), 90 (willfully disobeying a superior commissioned officer), 91 (insubordinate conduct, 2 specifications), 92 (failure to obey, 3 specifications), 107 (false official statements), 111 (drunk operation of a motor vehicle), 112 (drunk on watch), and 134 (disorderly conduct and communicating a threat). ...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700861

    Original file (ND0700861.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 Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USNR (DEP)19990520 - 19990728Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 19990729Years Contracted:; Extension: Date of Discharge:20020905Length of Service: 03Yrs 01Mths07 DysLost Time:unable to accurately...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801337

    Original file (ND0801337.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board determined based on the limited documentation provided an upgrade would be inappropriate and the characterization of service received, “General (Under Honorable Conditions)”, was an appropriate characterization considering the time served and the UCMJ violation involved.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found ADDENDUM: Information for the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700449

    Original file (ND0700449.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Violations of Articles 92 and 128 constitute the “commission of a serious offense”, which forms the basis for discharge in this case. The Applicant was properly processed for separation by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense. The Naval Military Personnel Manual, Article 3630600 (for the period in question) directs that Block 28 contain the phrase “Misconduct – commission of a serious offense” when separating under these conditions.Since no other Narrative Reason...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900682

    Original file (MD0900682.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board determined the characterization of service received, “Under Other Than Honorable Conditions”, was an appropriate characterization considering the length of service and the UCMJ violations involved, and based on the lack of post service documentation provided an upgrade would be inappropriate.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found ADDENDUM:...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901415

    Original file (MD0901415.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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.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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801010

    Original file (ND0801010.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 conduct mitigates the reason for the characterization of discharge.The Applicant provided a personal statement and documentation of his honorable discharge from the New York Army National Guard as evidence of post-service accomplishments. The Board determined an upgrade or...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101248

    Original file (ND1101248.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Types of Documents Submitted/reviewedRelated 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: Other Documentation: Additional Statements:From Applicant: From/To Representation:From/ToCongress member: DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801602

    Original file (ND0801602.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The command administratively separated the Applicant in lieu of trial by court martial.The Applicant has requested an upgrade to her discharge characterization to “Honorable”. After a thorough review of the applicant’s service record and other evidence; such as:the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record, Discharge Process and additional evidence submitted by the Applicant to the Board, it was determined that relief is warranted. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review,...