Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0701186
Original file (ND0701186.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-HTFN, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20070828
Characterization of Service Received:
Narrative Reason for Discharge: IN LIEU OF TRIAL BY COURT-MARTIAL
Authority for Discharge: MILPERSMAN 1910-106

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

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
 Inactive: US N R (DEP)      20020627 -                    Active:         
Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Enlistment: 20021119      Period of enlistment : Years Months    Date of Discharge: 20060721
Length of Service : Yrs Mths 20 D ys      Education Level:         Age at Enlistment:       AFQT:
Highest Rank /Rate : HTFN   Evaluation marks: Performance: NOT FOUND IN RECORD
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): Rifle , Pistol

Periods of UA /Confinement : 253/0

NJPs :    

Retention Warnings:


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)



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

Applicant’s Issues

 1. Reenlistment Opportunities
2. Made a bad choice

Decision

Date: 20 08 0306             Location: Washington D.C         R epresentation :

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall IN LIEU OF TRIAL BY COURT-MARTIAL .
Discussion

 : either 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 .

Issue 2: ( ). When a Sailor ’s service has been honest and faithful, it is appropriate to characterize that service under honorable conditions. An under other than honorable conditions discharge 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. The Applicant’s conduct during the current period of service, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, was marred by an unauthorized absence period of 253 days and a pending trial by court martial for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) Article 86 . Violation of UCMJ Article 8 6 , unauthorized absence over 30 days , is considered a serious offense for which a punitive discharge is authorized if adjudged by a Special or General Courts Martial. Sailors may be separated upon their request in lieu of trial by special or general courts-martial if charges have been preferred with respect to an offense for which a punitive discharge is authorized and it has been determined that the Sailor is unqualified for future military service. The Applicant, after consultation with Defense Council, voluntarily signed the request. A change of Characterization of Service w ould be inappropriate.

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

Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 11, effective 31 May 2005 and Present, Article 1910-106, SEPARATION IN LIEU OF TRIAL BY COURT-MARTIAL.

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 . 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 | ND0800353

    Original file (ND0800353.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Narrative Reason Change Decision Date: 20080314Location: Washington D.C Representation: By a vote of the Characterization shall .By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall IN LIEU OF TRIAL BY COURT MARTIAL.Discussion Issue 1: The Applicant implies that he was treated unfairly by his command due to his Conscientious Objector request not being favorably considered. An upgrade to General under honorable conditions would be inappropriate.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100081

    Original file (ND1100081.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years of the Applicant’s date of discharge. If a former member has been discharged for more than 15 years, has already been granted a personal appearance hearing or has otherwise exhausted their opportunities before the NDRB, the Applicant may petition the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR), 2...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800730

    Original file (ND0800730.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In service – Equity.2. ” 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 related reasons.Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records can grant this type of narrative reason change.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700578

    Original file (ND0700578.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    20060725 Consulted with or Waived Counsel: Acknowledged Understanding Elements: Acknowledged Guilt to: Article(s) 121 (Larceny), 123 (Uttering Checks with insufficient funds) BCD/DD authorized for offense(s) Acknowledged Consequences of OTH: Type of Characterization Requested: Commanding Officer Recommendation (date): (20060806) Separation Authority (date): Commanding Officer, NIOC, Georgia (20060821) Reason for Discharge directed: Characterization directed: Date Applicant...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800269

    Original file (ND0800269.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request: Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USNR (DEP) 19981121 - 19981207 Active: 19981208 – 20020829 HON Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20020830 Period of enlistment: Years Extension Date of Discharge: 20040513Length of Service: Yrs Mths Dys Education Level: Age at Enlistment: AFQT: 33Highest Rank/Rate: SN Evaluation marks: Performance: 4.0(1) Behavior: 4.0(1) OTA: 3.86 Awards and Decorations...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800268

    Original file (ND0800268.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 Pertinent Regulation/Law A. ” 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700160

    Original file (ND0700160.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Applicant’s Issues:1. Discharge Process Charge(s) Preferred:19970611Charge(s) and Specification(s): Article 86: Unauthorized absence from 19961220 until apprehended on 19970331Date Applicant Submitted SILT request: 19970630 Consulted with or Waived Counsel: Acknowledged Understanding Elements: Acknowledged Guilt to: Article(s) 86 BCD/DD authorized for offense(s) Acknowledged Consequences of OTH: Type of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700841

    Original file (ND0700841.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) 20020420 - 20020702 Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20020703Years Contracted:; Extension: Date of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001409

    Original file (ND1001409.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/ToCongress member: Pertinent Regulation/Law A. Moreover, although the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1102117

    Original file (ND1102117.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    He could have submitted documentation as specified in the Post-Service Conduct paragraph in the Addendum , however, completion of these items alone does not guarantee an upgrade from an unfavorable discharge as each discharge is reviewed by the Board on a case by case basis. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years of the Applicant’s date...