Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0701176
Original file (ND0701176.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
                 
ex-SR, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20070828
Characterization of Service Received:
Narrative Reason for Discharge:
Authority for Discharge: MILPERSMAN 3630600 (misconduct)

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

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
 Inactive: US N R (DEP)      19890825 - 19890828              Active:
Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Enlistment: 19890829      Period of enlistment : Years Extension          Date of Discharge: 19921009
Length of Service : Yrs Mths 15 D ys      Education Level:         Age at Enlistment:       AFQT: 53
Highest Rank /Rate : SA     Evaluation marks: Performance: 3.2 ( 1 )     Behavior: 2.8 ( 1 )          OTA: 3.20
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):

Periods of UA : 19910301-19910312 (11 DAYS) ; 19910419-19910507 (18 DAYS) ; 19910703-19910726 (23 DAYS) ;
19920327-19920330 ( 0 3 DAYS) ; 19920427-19920428 ( 0 1 DAY) ; 19920817-19920824 ( 0 7 DAYS)

NJPs :    
         19900 3 14 : Art(s) 134 ( D rinking) .                          Awarded - Susp -
19900927 : Art(s) 134 ( Drinking/drunk/disorderly),
2 specifications.       Awarded - CC Su sp -
19920410 : Art(s) 86 (UA),
2 spec ifications .       Awarded - , Susp -
         19920520 : Art(s) 86 ,
6 specifications .       Awarded - , , , Susp -
1992082 7 : Art(s) 86              Awarded -                Susp -

Retention Warnings: .
         19900314 : For pattern of misconduct evidenced by violation of the UCMJ, Article 134: Drinking underage .
19900504 : For excessive drinking, with subsequent loss of control of your temper.
 19920529 : For financial indebtedness .


Types of Documents Submitted

 Related to Military Service:      DD 214:          Service and/or Medical Record:            Other Records:

Related to Post-Service Period:  
         Employment:                        Finances:                          Education /Training :     
         Health/Medical Records:           Substance Abuse:                           Criminal Records:       
         Family/Personal Status:           Community Service:                References:              
        
Additional Statements From Applicant:             From Representat ion :              From Member of Congress:
Other Documentation (Describe) Statement in Support of Claim , News Article , Copy of ATM Card, Illegible ID,



DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB)
DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT

Applicant’s Issues

 1. Family Problems .
2. Treated Unfairly by Command .
3 Post Service .

Decision

Date: 20 08 050 9             Location: Washington D.C         R epresentation :

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
 By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall MISCONDUCT-PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT .
Discussion

 Issue s 1 and 2 (Equity): The Applicant contends his “ Under O ther T han H onorable ” characterization of service was too harsh due to the hardship his family was facing as a result of los ing all of their property due to California wild fires; he also states he was treated unfairly by his command.

During Board reviews the government is presumed to conduct its affairs with regularity unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant. When a member ’ s service has been honest and faithful, it is appropriate to characterize that service under honorable conditions. A n “Under O ther T han Honorable” characterization of service is warranted when significant negative aspects of a member’s conduct or performance of duty outweigh the positive aspects of the member’s military record. T he Applicant’s service was marred by three retention warning s and five non - judicial punishments for violations of the U niform C ode of M ilitary J ustice, Articles : 86 (Unauthorized absence) , 9 specifica t ions; and 134 ( Underage drinking and d runk/ d isorderly conduct) , 3 specifications . These non - judicial punishments form the basis for the Applicants administrative discharge based on a pattern of misconduct , which is defined as t wo or more punishments during the same enlistment.

The Applicant was notified of his impending discharge and of his right s to consult with legal counsel and to be heard before an Administrative discharge board. The Applicant waived all rights and did not object to his discharge or characterization of service. After assuring compliance with MILPERSMAN 3630600, the separation authority directed the Applicant’s discharge by reason of misconduct , due to a pattern of misconduct , with a service characterization of “Under O ther T han H onorable ” . The Board could not find in the record, nor did the Applicant provide, documentation supporting the claim the command treated the Applicant unfairly. The Applicant’s discharge was consistent with the standards of Naval discipline and discharge proceedings. As such, the Board determined an upgrade was not warranted.

Issue 3 (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 sector subsequent to leaving the service. 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 no documentation of post-service accomplishments. The Applicant's efforts need to be more encompassing than those provided. For example, the Applicant could have produced evidence of continuing educational pursuits, a verifiable employment record, documentation of community service, evidence of drug free existence, and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities. The Board determined t he Applicant did not provide adequate documentation to support the claim his post service conduct should be a reason for an upgrade in the characterization of discharge .

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. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C, effective 15 August 1991 until 4 March 1993), Article 3630600, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT - A PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT.

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 | 2008_Navy | ND0801228

    Original file (ND0801228.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board determined based on the limited documentation provided an upgrade would be inappropriate and the characterization of service received, “Under Other Than Honorable Conditions”, was an appropriate characterization considering the limited time served and the UCMJ violations involved.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 ADDENDUM:...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801592

    Original file (ND0801592.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801259

    Original file (ND0801259.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant contends his discharge should be upgraded to “Honorable ” based on his overall service which was faithful and honorable.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, Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900188

    Original file (ND0900188.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The separation authority directed separation with an “Under Other Than Honorable Conditions” discharge due to a pattern of misconduct. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record Entries, and Discharge Process, the Board found 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801194

    Original file (ND0801194.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Sailor and the Board determined an upgrade 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 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900298

    Original file (ND0900298.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USNR (DEP)20001118 - 20001204Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20001205Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20010831Highest Rank/Rate: ARLength of Service: Year(s)Month(s)27 Day(s)Education Level:AFQT: 73EvaluationMarks:Performance:NOBBehavior:3.0(1)OTA: 3.00Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):NONEPeriods of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801180

    Original file (ND0801180.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Based on the severity and frequency of offenses committed by the Applicant and the lack of mitigating factors, the Board determined the “Under Other Than Honorable” discharge was the most appropriate characterization of service and upgrade 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 ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801391

    Original file (ND0801391.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board determined the misconduct represented significant negative conduct and the awarded discharge characterization was appropriate; an upgrade to “Honorable” 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 ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant Complaint Procedures : If you believe that the decision in your case is unclear,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801577

    Original file (ND0801577.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant contends his discharge should be upgraded because he was experiencing family hardship which caused stress and depression and his command did not give him a fair chance.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.The Applicant submitted documentation of college enrollment and transcript of military courses in...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801594

    Original file (ND0801594.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Violations of Article 112a result in mandatory processing for an administrative separation which usually results in an unfavorable characterization of discharge.The Applicant has requested a change in their discharge characterization to “Honorable”. 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 ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant Complaint...