Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0701155
Original file (ND0701155.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
ex-AN, USN
ND07-01155

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20070821   Characterization Received:
Narrative Reason: HARDSHIP       Authority: MILPERSMAN 3630200

 Applicant’s Request:      Characterization change to:
                           Narrative Re ason change :

Applicant’s Issues:       1. Served honorably and faithfully
                          

Decision

 By a vote of the Characterization shall .
 By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall HARDSHIP .
Date: 20 08 117              Location: Washington D.C         R epresentation :


Discussion

 After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this cas e, the NDRB discerned an impropriety in the Applicant’s characterization of service . The Board voted 5-0 that the character ization of service shall change to HONORABL.

Naval Military Personnel Manual, ( NAVPERS 15560C), Change 14, effective 03 Oct 96 until 11 Dec 97, Article 3620210 , SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL BY REASON OF CONVENIENCE OF THE GOVERNMENT - DEPENDENCY OR HARDSHIP , states : The characterization for separation should be Honorable, unless General (Under Honorable Conditions) is warranted based upon enlisted performance evaluations. For the period of service in question honorable evaluations are defined as an overall trait average of 2.0 or higher. The Applicant’s final trait average was 2.83. There fore, by unanimous vote relief is warranted based on an improper characterization of service assigned on the Applicant’s original DD-214 . The characterization of service sh all be changed to “ HONORABLE ”. Relief granted.


Summary of Service

Prior Service:
 Inactive: US N R (DEP) 19930830 - 19940131                
Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Enlistment: 19940201                        Years Contracted : 4                Date of Discharge: 19970520
Length of Service : 03 Yrs 03 Mths 20 D ys                                                                Lost Time :
Education Level: 53 hours of college      Age at Enlistment: 24     AFQT: 53          Highest Rank /Rate : AN
Evaluation marks (# of occasions):       Performance: 3.0 ( 1 )      Behavior: 2.0 ( 1 )                 OTA: 2.83 (1)
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): NDSM, SSDR (2), SWASM (W/ bronze star), MUC


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

 19960927:        Applicant unauthorized absent from 0001 until 0318, Fenwick Pier, Hong Kong.

19961004:        NJP – Viol ation of UCMJ Art icle 86 (unauthorized absence)
         Awarded - FOP ($ 200/month for 2 months , one month suspended for six months ); RIR ( suspended for six months ); Restr ( 30 days); Extra duties ( 30 days).

19961007:        Retention Warning.

19970121:        Applicant unauthorized absent at 0745.

19970124:        Applicant from unauthorized absence at 2330, (2 days)
19970221:        NJP – Viol ation of UCMJ Art icle 86 (unauthorized absence)
         Awarded - FOP ($ 300/month for two months); RIR ( suspended six months ); Restr ( 60 days).

Discharge Process

 Voluntary
 Date requested :                                       19970423                                             
Separation Authority (date):     Commanding Officer, USS INDEPENDENCE (CV 62) ( 19970425 )
 Reason for discharge directed:  HARDSHIP
Characterization directed:     
Date Applicant Discharged:       19970520


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 14, effective 03 Oct 96 until 11 Dec 97, Article 3620210, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL BY REASON OF CONVENIENCE OF THE GOVERNMENT - DEPENDENCY OR HARDSHIP.
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 | ND0700386

    Original file (ND0700386.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 Service Prior Service: Inactive: USNR (DEP)20000127 - 20000208Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20000209Years Contracted:; Extension: Date of Discharge:20030815 Length of Service: 03 Yrs 06Mths06 DysLost Time:Days UA: Days Confined: Education...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0701075

    Original file (ND0701075.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board determined that the documentation provided by the Applicant did not mitigate the misconduct which resulted in the Applicant’s discharge and characterization of his service. Appeal denied 19921002: Vacated previously suspended punishment due to continued misconduct.19921002: NJP – Violation of UCMJ Article 86 (unauthorized absence, three specifications): 0630 19920919 UA from restricted muster, 0630 19920922 UA from restricted muster, 0630 19920923 Awarded - FOP ($100/month for two...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0701079

    Original file (ND0701079.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 Service Prior Service: Inactive: USNR (DEP) 19940722 - 19941211 Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 19941212Years Contracted:4Date of Discharge:19970917Length of Service: 02 Yrs 09 Mths06 DysLost Time:unable to determine Education Level: Age at...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00105

    Original file (ND99-00105.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND99-00105 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 981023, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION After a thorough review of the records, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper and equitable (C and D).In issue 1, the applicant states that his “discharge was based on only the three month’s time that the applicant was...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-01261

    Original file (ND04-01261.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION 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

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700284

    Original file (ND0700284.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board determined that the documentation provided by the Applicant did not mitigate the misconduct which resulted in the Applicant’s discharge and characterization of his service. Recommendation on Separation: - Recommendation on Characterization: Commanding Officer Recommendation (date): (19930219) Separation Authority (date): BUPERS (19930310)Reason for discharge directed: - Characterization directed: Date Applicant Discharged: 19930324 Types of Documents Submitted by Applicant and...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00901

    Original file (ND04-00901.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. PART IV - INFORMATION FOR THE APPLICANT 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 Directive 1332.28, you may submit a complaint in accordance with Enclosure (5) of that Directive. You may view DoD Directive 1332.28 and other Decisional...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700861

    Original file (ND0700861.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 Service Prior Service: Inactive: USNR (DEP)19990520 - 19990728Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 19990729Years Contracted:; Extension: Date of Discharge:20020905Length of Service: 03Yrs 01Mths07 DysLost Time:unable to accurately...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0701077

    Original file (ND0701077.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 Service Prior Service: Inactive: USNR (DEP) 19980127 - 19980204 Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 19980205Years Contracted:4; Extension: 16 Months (EAOS 20030604)Date of Discharge: 20030602Length of Service: 05 Yrs 03Mths24 Dys Lost Time: 03...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00010

    Original file (ND00-00010.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The discharge shall remain: GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS/HARDSHIP, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-110 (formerly 3620210).The NDRB did note an administrative error on the original DD Form 214. Issues Prior to the documentary discharge review, the applicant introduced no issues as block 8 on the DD Form 293 is blank. After a thorough review of the records, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper and equitable (C and D).The...