Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700779
Original file (ND0700779.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
ex-SA, USN
ND07-00779
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20070522   Characterization Received:
Narrative Reason: IN LIEU OF TRIAL BY COURT-MARTIAL      Authority: MILPERSMAN 1910-106

 Applicant’s Request:      Characterization change to:
                           Narrative Reason change to:
Applicant’s Issues:       1. Discharge is improper because it says In Lieu of Trial by Court Martial. The discharge s hould be an Entry Level Discharge.
                           2. Immature in service.

Decision

 By a vote of the Characterization shall .
 By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall IN LIEU OF TRIAL BY COURT-MARTIAL .

Date: 20 07121 3                   Location: Washington D.C          R epresentation :

Discussion

 Issue 1: ( ). The Applicant contends that his discharge is improper because Entry Level Separation is more proper than In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial . For the Applicant’s information , the characterization of discharge describes the quality of the member’s service. In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial is a narrative reason as to why a member was discharged. Per regulations, a n Entry Level Separation is only given to members discharged within the first 180 days of their service. The Board determined that the Narrative Reason for the Applicant’s discharge was appropriate and that an Entry Level Separation would not be appropriate, under any conditions, based on the Applicant’s length of service. The Board also determined that in order for the Applicant’s to receive a narrative reason of In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial, the Applicant had to have requested this type of separation in plea-bargaining fashion to avoid court-martial proceedings.

Issue 2: ( ). The Applicant contends that his problems were attributed to his immaturity. While he may feel that this was the underlying cause of his misconduct, the record clearly reflects his willful misconduct and demonstrated he was unfit for further service. The evidence of record did not show that the Applicant was either not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions.

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)      19990628 - 19990707              Active:         
Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Enlistment: 19990708      Years Contracted : ; Extension:   Date of Discharge: 20010517
Length of Service : 0 Yrs 6 Mths 13 D ys    Lost Time : Days UA: 511 Days Confine d : NOT FOUND IN RECORD
Education Level:         Age at Enlistment:       AFQT: 40          Highest Rank /Rate : SA
Evaluation marks (# of occasions):       Performance: N/A
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): NONE



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

 19990922:        Applicant to UA status

19991020:        Applicant from UA status

19991103 :        NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art. 86 – Unauthorized Absence (28 days) .
         Awarded - FOP ( $ 230.00 ) for ( 1 months); Restr for ( 14 days); Extra duties ( 14 days) .
19991124:        Applicant to UA status.

20001125:        Applicant from UA status (365 days)

20010103:        Applicant to UA status.

20010429:        Applicant from UA status. (118 days)
Discharge Process

 Charge(s) Preferred: NOT FOUND IN RECORD
Charge(s) and Specification(s):
         Article NOT FOUND IN RECORD
        

Date Applicant Submitted SILT request:            20010501
         Consulted with or Waived Counsel:                
         Acknowledged Understanding Elements:    
         Acknowledged Guilt to:                     Article(s) NOT FOUND IN RECORD
                  BCD/DD authorized for offense(s)        
         Acknowledged Consequences of OTH:       
         Type of Characterization Requested:      NOT FOUND IN RECORD

Commanding Officer Recommendation (date):        NOT FOUND IN RECORD
Separation Authority (date):                       NOT FOUND IN RECORD
         Reason for Discharge directed:            NOT FOUND IN RECORD
         Characterization directed:                         NOT FOUND IN RECORD
Date Applicant Discharged :                         20010517



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 29, effective
11 Jul 2000 until 21 Aug 2002, Article 1910-106 (formerly 3630650), SEPARATION IN LIEU OF TRIAL BY COURT-MARTIAL.

B. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part IV , Para 403m(7)(b), Presumption Concerning Court-Martial Specifications .
C . 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 .

D . 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 (more 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 | 2012_Navy | ND1200255

    Original file (ND1200255.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Representation: 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 governmentalaffairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1300534

    Original file (ND1300534.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends he was discharged without proper administrative process.2. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100912

    Original file (ND1100912.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 and the narrative reason for separation shall .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 eligible for a...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901484

    Original file (ND0901484.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities. A preponderance of the evidence reviewed supports the conclusion the Applicant committed a serious offense, that separation from the Naval service was appropriate, and a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge was warranted.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entriesand discharge...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900191

    Original file (MD0900191.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.Applicant did not know he was UA for 30 years, believed he was discharged. The NDRB determined 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: Information for the Applicant Complaint Procedures : If you...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700787

    Original file (ND0700787.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    An upgrade would be inappropriate.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. ” 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901294

    Original file (ND0901294.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    ex-SN, USN Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request Application Received: 20090410 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: USNR (DEP) 20030611 - 20030701 Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20030702 Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: Years Extension Date of Discharge: 20050204...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900049

    Original file (ND0900049.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board determined the characterization of service received, “Under Other Than HonorableConditions”, 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.Should the Applicant obtain additional evidence he may wish to apply for a personal appearance. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service,...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900563

    Original file (MD0900563.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB therefore only considered the Applicant’s request to upgrade his characterization of service to “General (Under Honorable Conditions).”: 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 Board determined the awarded discharge was appropriate and an upgrade would be inappropriate.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700651

    Original file (MD0700651.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Applicant’s Issues:1. Marines may be separated upon their request in lieu of trial by special or general courts-martial if charges have been preferred with respect to an offense for which a punitive discharge is authorized and it has been determined that the Marine is unqualified for future military service. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance...