Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700972
Original file (ND0700972.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
ex-YNSR, USN
ND07-00972
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20070625   Characterization Received:
Narrative Reason: COURT-MARTIAL          Authority: MILPERSMAN 5815-010

 Applicant’s Request:      Characterization change to:
                           Narrative Reason change to:
Applicant’s Issues:       1. Clemency
                           2. Post Service

Decision

 By a vote of the Characterization shall .
 By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall COURT-MARTIAL .

Date: 20 080110                      Location: Washington D.C          R epresentation :

Discussion

 Issue 1: ( Clemency ). In response to the Applicant’s clemency request, relevant and material facts stated in a court-martial specification are presumed by the NDRB to be established facts. With respect to a discharge adjudged by a court-martial case, 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. The Applicant’s case was considered under the pertinent standards of equity to determine if any factors in this particular case merited clemency. The NDRB found the evidence of record did not contain sufficient mitigating or extenuating factors to offset the seriousness of the offense for which the discharge was awarded. In addition, the reason for discharge, convicted by special court-martial, is most appropriate.

Issue 2 : (Equity). The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. However, 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 the civilian life subsequent to leaving the service. Normally, to permit relief, a procedural impropriety or inequity must have been found to have existed during the period of enlistment in question. Outstanding post-service conduct, 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, is considered. The Applicant provided documentation of educational accomplishments . The Applicant's efforts need to be more encompassing. For example, the Applicant could have produced evidence of a verifiable and continuous employment record, documentation of community service, a nd certification of non-involvement with civil authorities. The Board determined that the documentation provided by the Applicant did not mitigate the misconduct that resulted in the characterization of discharge.

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)      19951212 - 19960522              Active:          19960523 - 19990530
Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Enlistment: 19990531      Years Contracted : ; Extension: 14 MONTHS          Date of Discharge: 20060612
Length of Service : 9 Yrs 10 Mths 07 D ys   Lost Time : 77 Days UA: Days Confine d : 77
Education Level:         Age at Enlistment:       AFQT: 39          Highest Rank /Rate : YN2
Evaluation marks (# of occasions):       Performance: (    )   Behavior: (    )      OTA: 4.2
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): NAVY ACHIEVEMENT MEDAL (2), NAVY GOOD CONDUCT MEDAL (2), NAVY BATTLE "E" ROBBON, OVERSEAS DEPLOYMENT RIBBON, ARTIC SERVICE RIBBON, NATO MEDAL.

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

 19990531 :         Applicant reenlists.

20011002:        Applicant extends enlistment for 14 months. Contract expires 20060730.

Discharge Process
Charge(s) and Specification(s): Article 121 , Larceny ; Article 123 , Forgery .
Preferred: 20050413       Court-martial: 20050603   Findings: Guilty of Article(s) 121, 123
Sentence: BCD; Conf 90 days ; RIR E-1 ; FOP NONE ; Other: NONE              CA action: 20051122
NC&PB Action: NONE Clemency: Parole: Restoration:                                
Appellate Review Complete: 20060331       BCD ordered executed: 20060607 SSPCMCO No. 200600072
Applicant Discharged: 20060612

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. The Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 12, effective 19 September 2005 until Present,
Article 5815-010, EXECUTING A DISHONORABLE OR BAD CONDUCT DISCHARGE.

 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)(a), Presumption Concerning Court-Martial Specifications .


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 | ND0900543

    Original file (ND0900543.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Service and Medical Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found clemency was not warranted and the sentence awarded the Applicant at his court-martial was appropriate for the offenses he committed. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700537

    Original file (ND0700537.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: HARDSHIPApplicant’s Issues:1.Narrative Reason change due to wife’s illness2. After a thorough review of the Applicant’s record, issues submitted, post service, and the standards of discipline, the Board determined that clemency was not warranted. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0701074

    Original file (ND0701074.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Applicant’s Issues:1. Additionally, the Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities. ” Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records can grant this type of narrative reason change.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700320

    Original file (ND0700320.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Applicant’s Issues:1. 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)NONEActive: 19980305–Unable to determine? Additionally, the NDRB does not have the authority to change a narrative reason for...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700127

    Original file (ND0700127.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 offenses he committed.Issue 2:(Equity). 05-0336 Date Applicant Discharged: 20050224 Types of Documents Submitted by Applicant and Considered By BoardRelated to Military Service: Service and/or Medical Record:Other Records: Related to Post-Service...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1401627

    Original file (ND1401627.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/To Congress member: Pertinent Regulation/Law A. DEPARTMENT OF THE...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0601209

    Original file (ND0601209.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. Additionally, the Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700198

    Original file (ND0700198.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a thorough review of the Applicant’s record, issue submitted, and post service accomplishments, the Board determined that the Applicant’s diagnosis did not provide grounds for misconduct, clemency was not warranted and that the sentence awarded the Applicant at his court-martial was appropriate for the offenses he committed. Additionally, the Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities. Whenever a member is being...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0701042

    Original file (ND0701042.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Discharge Process Charge and Specification: Article 86.Preferred: 19990325Court-martial: 19990419 Findings: Guilty of Article 86Sentence: BCD - Conf 90 days; FOP - $600/month for three months; CA action: 19990716NC&PB Action: NONEAppellate Review Complete: 20001121 BCD ordered executed: 20001129Applicant Discharged: 20001129 Types of Documents Submitted by Applicant and Considered By BoardRelated to Military Service: Service and/or Medical Record:Other Records: Related to Post-Service...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901662

    Original file (ND0901662.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a thorough review of the Applicant’s record and issues submitted, the Board determined that clemency was not warranted and that the sentence awarded the Applicant at his court-martial was appropriate for the offense he committed.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, and Applicant’s statement, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reason for...