Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0701042
Original file (ND0701042.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
ex-ETSR, USN
ND07-01042

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20070726   Characterization Received:
Narrative Reason: COURT-MARTIAL          Authority: MILPERSMAN 5815-010

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

Applicant’s Issues:       1. Change RE code to allow reenlistment.
                          

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

 : 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 .

R elevant 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. 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 offen se he committed.


Summary of Service

Prior Service:
 Inactive: US N R (DEP) 19970716 - 19971007                
Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Enlistment: 19971008      Years Contracted : 4 ; Extension: 12 months         Date of Discharge: 20001129
Length of Service : 01 Yrs 00 Mths 15 D ys                                       Lost Time : 762
Education Level: 12       Age at Enlistment: 19     AFQT: NA          Highest Rank /Rate : ETSR
Evaluation marks (# of occasions):       Performance: NA   Behavior: NA              OTA: NA
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): None


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

 19980506 :        NJP (no further information found in record)

199780506:       Retention Warning for violations of UCMJ Article 92 (failure to obey).
19980701 :        NJP (no further information found in record)

19980701:        Retention Warning for violations of UCMJ Article 86 (unauthorized absence, 6 specifications) and 92 (failure to obey).

19980806:        Applicant reported for duty aboard USS JACKSONVILLE (SSN 699).
19980906:        Applicant to unauthorized absence at 0715.

 19981002:        Applicant from unauthorized absence at 0200 (26 days , surrendered ).
19981007:        NJP – Viol ation of UCMJ Art icle 86 (unauthorized absence) and 87 (missing movement)       .
         Awarded - RIR ( E-1 )

19981008:        Applicant to unauthorized absence at 2400.

19990212:        Applicant from unauthorized absence at 0750 (127 days, apprehended).
19990212:        Applicant to pre-trial confinement.
19990419:        Applicant administratively transferred to TPU Norfolk.
19990419:        Applicant from pre-trial confinement (67 days) .

19990419:        Special Court Martial – Violation of UCMJ Article 86 (unauthorized absence).
         Awarded – FOP ($600/month for 3 months). Confinement (90 days, SPMCA vacated that above to time served 66 days), Discharge (Bad Conduct Discharge).

19990810:        Applicant administratively transferred to NAMALA Washington DC.

20001129:        Applicant discharged.


Discharge Process

 Charge and Specifi cation : Article 86 .
 Preferred: 19990325 Court-martial: 19990419       Findings: Guilty of Article 86
Sentence: BCD - Conf 90 days ; FOP - $600/month for three months ; CA action: 19990716
NC&PB Action: NONE                                 
Appellate Review Complete: 20001121       BCD ordered executed: 20001129
Applicant Discharged: 20001129

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 22, effective 15 Dec 98 to 21 Aug 2002, Article 5815-010 (formerly 3640420), 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 .

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 (in excess of 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 | ND0700078

    Original file (ND0700078.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 warranted. 19990419: Special Court Martial for violations of UCMJ Articles: 86 (unauthorized absence) from 19990212 until 19990303 (apprehended) Plea: Guilty Finding: Guilty 92 (violation of lawful order) Plea: Guilty Finding: Guilty 134 (Possession of a false military ID card with intend to deceive) Plea: Guilty Finding: Guilty Award: Reduction to...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600883

    Original file (ND0600883.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    030724: NMCCCA: The findings of guilty and sentence, as approved on review are affirmed.031016: Appellate review complete.031020: SSPCMO: Article 71c, UCMJ, having been complied with, Bad Conduct discharge ordered executed. Relief is not authorized.The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of discharge. The Manual for courts-martial authorizes the award of a punitive discharge if...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600707

    Original file (ND0600707.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s service was marred nonjudicial punishment proceedings on 20011114 and a special court-martial conviction on 20030812 for violations of UCMJ Article 92 Failure to obey order or regulation (2 specifications); Article 120 Carnal knowledge; and Article 134 Indecent act (2 specifications). After a thorough review of the Applicant’s records and issues submitted, the Board determined that clemency was not warranted and that the sentence awarded the Applicant at his court-martial...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600429

    Original file (ND0600429.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION Issues, as stated Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application: “ Respectfully request change of bad conduct discharge into an honorable discharge, also please change my separation code:jjd/901 and re-entry code of re4. 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 violations of the UCMJ, Articles 86 (Unauthorized...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801481

    Original file (ND0801481.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. ” 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.

  • 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 | 2003_Navy | ND03-00173

    Original file (ND03-00173.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    (Equity Issue) Pursuant to 10 USC 874 (b) (UCMJ, Article 74) and in accordance with SECNAVINST 5420.174C, enclosure (1), paragraphs 2.24 and 9.3, this former member requests the Board’s clemency relief with up-grade of his characterization of service on the basis of his post-service conduct.” Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant’s DD Form 214 (2) Letter from Applicant, dated October 1,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00105

    Original file (ND02-00105.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The discharge shall remain: BAD CONDUCT/Convicted by special court martial, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 5815-010 (formerly 3640420).The NDRB did note an administrative error on the original DD Form 214. (Equity Issue) Pursuant to 10 USC 874 (b) (UCMJ, Article 74) and in accordance with SECNAVINST 5420.174C, enclosure (1), paragraphs 2.24 and 9.3, this former member requests the Board’s clemency relief with up-grade of his characterization of service to under honorable conditions on...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0701043

    Original file (ND0701043.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a thorough review of the Applicant’s record, issues submitted, the Board determined that discharge awarded the Applicant at his court-martial was appropriate for the offenses he committed. 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)20000811 - 20000820Active:...

  • 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...