Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700863
Original file (ND0700863.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
ex-CTOSN, USN
ND07-00863
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20070612   Characterization Received:
Narrative Reason: DISABILITY, SEVERANCE PAY      Authority: MILPERSMAN 1910-168

 Applicant’s Request:      Characterization change to:
                           Narrative Reason change to:
Applicant’s Issues:       1. Reentry Code does not correspond to characterization of discharge
                           2. Separation Code does not correspond to characterization of discharge
                           3. No legal or disciplinary issues during service

Decision

 By a vote of the Characterization shall .
 By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall DISABILITY, SEVERANCE PAY .

Date: 20 071220             Location: Washington D.C          R epresentation :

Discussion

 Issue 1: 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 2: ( ). The Board has only administrative jurisdiction over block 27 on the DD-214. The Board found that code “JFL” does correspond with the Narrative Reason for separation of the Applicant and therefore the Board has no justification to change the code.

Issue 3: ( ). The Applicant contends she had no legal or disciplinary issues during her service and therefore her characterization of discharge should be Honorable. The Board found the Applicant’s service record in complete. The Board did find that on 20000730 the Applicant certified that she had never been charged with, arrested or convicted of any charges other than felony charges. In the Applicant’s medical record , the Board found that on 20010925 that the Applicant admitted to shoplifting but the charges were dropped The Board was unable to clarify the discrepancy between these two entries from the documentation on hand . Therefore , the Board presum es regularity in the conduct of government affairs and determined 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. 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 tha t


Summary of Service

Prior Service:
 Inactive: US N R (DEP)      2000731 - 20010205               Active:         
Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Enlistment: 20010206      Years Contracted : ; Extension:   Date of Discharge: 20020215
Length of Service : 1 Yrs 0 Mths 10 D ys    Lost Time : Days UA: Days Confine d :
Education Level:         Age at Enlistment:       AFQT: 78          Highest Rank /Rate : CTOSN
Evaluation marks (# of occasions):       Performance: NONE FOUND IN RECORD
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): NONE

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

 20000730 :        Standard Form 85 (National Agency Check Security Information): Applicant certifies she has not been charged, arrested, or convicted of any offenses.

200 10925:        Report of Medical History: Applicant acknowledges she had been arrested for shop lifting but charges were dropped.

Discharge Process

 NOT FOUND IN RECORD

Date Applicant Discharged:        20020215

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), para 1910-168, SEPARATION BY REASON OF DISABILITY, SEVERANCE PAY.

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 .


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 | ND0700915

    Original file (ND0700915.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 ServicePrior Service: Inactive: USNR (DEP)20000926 - 20000927Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20000928Years Contracted:; Extension: Date of Discharge:20020219Length of Service: 1 Yrs 4Mths22 DysLost Time:Days UA: Days Confined: Education Level:...

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1001712

    Original file (MD1001712.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USMCR (DEP)19990902 - 19991114Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 19991115Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: Years MonthsDate of Discharge:20020215Highest Rank:Length of Service:Year(s)Month(s)10Day(s)Education Level: AFQT:67MOS: 3451Proficiency/Conduct Marks (# of occasions):()/(7)Fitness Reports: Awards and Decorations (per DD...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801614

    Original file (ND0801614.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB determined the awarded discharge characterization was appropriate and an upgrade founded upon these circumstances would be inappropriate.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 Pertinent Regulation/Law A. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1102169

    Original file (ND1102169.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: Pertinent Regulation/Law A. DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100471

    Original file (ND1100471.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 | 2013_Navy | ND1301825

    Original file (ND1301825.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)19970716 - 19970924Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 19970925Age at Enlistment:Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:19980925Highest Rank/Rate:AALength of Service:Year(s)Month(s) 01 Day(s)Education Level:AFQT: 59EvaluationMarks:Performance:NFIRAwards and Decorations (per DD 214):NONEPeriods of UA/CONF:...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800719

    Original file (ND0800719.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Based on the aforementioned evidence, the NDRB determined there was an inequity in the characterization of discharge and an upgrade to “Honorable” would be appropriate.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 Pertinent Regulation/Law A. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800014

    Original file (ND0800014.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 Pertinent Regulation/Law A. ” 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101422

    Original file (ND1101422.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant seeks a change to his re-enlistment code to RE-1. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities. ” 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600039

    Original file (ND0600039.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Specification 2: SN D_ (Applicant) did at fleet information warfare center on or about 11 Dec 00, with intent to deceive, make to his CPO an official statement during suspect’s rights acknowledgement statement state that he did not commit larceny which was totally false and was then known by SN D_ (Applicant) to be so false. The names, and votes of the members of the...