Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700958
Original file (ND0700958.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
ex-AKAA, USN
ND07-00958
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20070703   Characterization Received:
Narrative Reason: MISCONDUCT     Authority: MILPERSMAN 1910-142

 Applicant’s Request:      Characterization change to:
                           Narrative Reason change to:
Applicant’s Issues:       1. Characterization not warranted by overall service record
                           2. Post service conduct

Decision

 By a vote of the Characterization shall .
 By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall MISCONDUCT .
Date: 20 080103             Location: Washington D.C         R epresentation :

Discussion

 Issue 1 ( ). An honorable characterization of service is warranted when the quality of a member’s service generally meets the standard of acceptable conduct and performance for naval personnel, or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization of service would be clearly inappropriate. A general (under honorable conditions) discharge is warranted when the quality of the member’s service has been honest and faithful but significant negative aspects of the member’s conduct or performance of duty outweighed the positive aspects of the member’s service record. The Applicant’s service was marred by 2 nonjudicial punishments (NJP) for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Articles 86, 92 and 107. Violations of Articles 92 and 107 are considered serious offenses for which a punitive discharge is authorized upon conviction at special or general court-martial. In addition, the Applicant was discharged for misconduct which apparently was a period of unauthorized absence for more than 30 days. Such misconduct also constitutes a serious offense. The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, reflects his willful failure to meet the requirements of his contract and falls far short of that required for an upgrade of his characterization of service.

Issue 2 ( ). 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 the service. The NDRB is authorized to consider outstanding post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge 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. After a complete review of the entire record, including the evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board determined that the discharge was appropriate and that the evidence of post-service conduct was found not to mitigate the conduct which precipitated the discharge.

Issue 3 (Propriety). The Board note d that the notification to the Applicant of proposed administrative separation inaccurately indicated that review by a General Court-Martial Convening Authority was not applicable. While error, the Board determined that, in light of his 2 documented NJPs and the period of unauthorized absence for which he was discharged, the Applicant was not prejudiced by this error.

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)      19960619 - 19960721              Active:         
Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Enlistment: 19960722                        Years Contracted : ; Extension:   Date of Discharge: 19981110
Length of Service : 02 Yrs 03 Mths 19 D ys          Lost Time : UNABLE TO DETERMINE   Education Level: Age at Enlistment:      AFQT: 45          Highest Rank /Rate : AN     Evaluation marks (# of occasions):       NOT FOUND IN RECORD
 Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): BATTLE “E”, SSDR, AFEM, NUC

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

 19970522 :        NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art. 92 – Dereliction of duty; Art 107 – False official statement .
         Awarded - FOP ( $ 450.00 ) for ( 2 months) , 1 month susp 6 months ; RIR ( E-1 ) , susp 6 months ; Restr for ( 30 days); Extra duties ( 30 days) .
19980729:        NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art. 86 – Unauthorized absence.
         Awarded - FOP ($500.00) for (2 months), 1 month susp 6 months; RIR (E-2); Restr for (30 days); Extra duties (30 days).
19981006:        To unauthorized absence.
Discharge Process

 Date Notified:                                       19981109
Reason for Discharge:     -
Least Favorable Characterization:       

Date Applicant Responded to Notification:                  19981109
Rights Elected at Notification:
         Consult with Counsel                      
         Obtain Copies of Documents               
         Submit Statement(s) (date)                        
         Administrative Board                       
         GCMCA review                                * (see discussion of Issue 3)

Commanding Officer Recommendation (date):       
Separation Authority (date):     CO, TPU PUGET SOUND ( 199 8 1109 )
 Reason for discharge directed:  -
Characterization directed:     
Date Applicant Discharged:       19981110

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 18, effective 12 Dec 97 until 29 March 2000, Article 1910-142 [formerly 3630605]. 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 86 , Absence without leave (for 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 | 2007_Navy | ND0700784

    Original file (ND0700784.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 19890607 Years Contracted: ; Extension: Date of Discharge: 19930218 Length of Service: 03 Yrs 08 Mths 12 Dys Lost Time: Days UA: 48 Days Confined: 25 Education Level: Age at Enlistment: AFQT: 59 Highest Rank/Rate: STGSN Evaluation marks (# of occasions): Performance: 3.2(4) Behavior: 3.3(4) OTA: 3.40 (4.0 scale) Awards and Decorations (per DD 214): NDSM Medical/Service Record Entries Related to Characterization of Service or Basis for...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700866

    Original file (ND0700866.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 Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214 The NDRB did note administrative error(s) on the original DD Form 214: “ CONTINUOUS HONORABLE ACTIVE SERVICE FROM 981214 UNTIL 021017 ” The NDRB will recommend to the Commander, Navy Personnel Command, that the DD 214 be...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0902108

    Original file (MD0902108.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USMCR (DEP)19940823 - 19950205Active:19950206 - 19981109 Active: 19981110 - 20020604Active: 20020605 - 20050104 Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20050105Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: Years MonthsDate of Discharge:20090104Highest Rank: Length of Service: Year(s)Month(s)00 Day(s)Education Level: AFQT:NFIRMOS: 0121Proficiency/Conduct Marks...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800210

    Original file (ND0800210.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant contends his discharge should be upgraded because his commanding officer directed he receive an honorable discharge. ” 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 NDRB does not have the authority to change a narrative reason for separation to one indicating a medical disability or other medical...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700454

    Original file (MD0700454.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 not warranted and that the sentence awarded the Applicant at his court-martial was appropriate for the offense that he committed. 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700744

    Original file (MD0700744.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    However, after a complete review of the entire record, including the evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board determined that the discharge was appropriate in light of the nature and seriousness of the Applicant’s misconduct, and that the evidence of post-service conduct was not sufficient to convince the Board that an upgrade was appropriate at this time. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Medical and Service Record...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700755

    Original file (ND0700755.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 Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214 The NDRB did note administrative error(s) on the original DD Form 214: “ UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE ” The NDRB will recommend to the Commander, Navy Personnel Command, that the DD 214 be corrected as appropriate. Discharge...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700541

    Original file (ND0700541.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s summary of service clearly documents the Applicants misconduct resulting in a civilian conviction and four nonjudicial punishments for violations of UCMJ Articles 86 (unauthorized absence, four specifications), 92 (failure to obey), 107 (false official statement, two specifications) and 128 (assault). The Board determined that the documentation provided by the Applicant did not mitigate the misconduct which resulted in the Applicant’s discharge and the characterization of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700739

    Original file (ND0700739.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    ex-FR, USN ND07-00739 Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request Application Received: 20070511 Characterization Received: OTHER THAN HONORABLE Narrative Reason: PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT Authority: MILPERSMAN 1910- 140 Applicant’s Request: Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Applicant’s Issues: 1. The Board noted the favorable comments indicating the Applicant’s post-service behavior; however, after a complete review of the entire record, including the evidence submitted by...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700133

    Original file (ND0700133.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    86 – [Unauthorized absence (2 specs)]; Viol of UCMJ Art 107 – (False official statement). ” 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. With respect to a discharge adjudged by a court-martial, the action of the NDRB is restricted to upgrades based on clemency.