Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800206
Original file (ND0800206.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-AN, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20071126
Characterization of Service Received:
Narrative Reason for Discharge:
Authority for Discharge: MILPERSMAN

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

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
 Inactive: US N R (DEP)      20010130 - 20010211             
Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Enlistment: 20010212               Period of enlistment : Years +         Date of Discharge: 20051108
Length of Service : Yrs Mths 27 D ys      Education Level: GED              Age at Enlistment: 18     AFQT: 65
Highest Rank /Rate : AN     Evaluation marks: Performance: 3.0 ( 2 )    Behavior: 1.5 ( 2 )                  OTA: 2.35 (2)
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): , , , , , and


C C :       20050727 : Offense - Assault and battery . Sentence – 12 months jail (20060612 charges reversed and annulled) .


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. Reenlist
2. Discharged because of civil conviction which was later overturned on appeal.


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 MISCONDUCT (SERIOUS OFFENSE) .

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 ( ): For the information of the Applicant, d espite a servicemember’s prior record of se rvice certain serious offenses warrant separation from the n aval service in order to maintain proper order and discipline. The characterization of service is a description of the total service provided during the member’s enlistment. When the service of a member of the U.S. Navy has been honest and faithful, it is appropriate to characterize that service as honorable. A general ( under honorable conditions ) di scharge is warranted when significant negative aspects of a member’s overall conduct or performance of duty outweigh the positive aspects of the member’s military record. The Applicant’s service was marred by confrontational situation which resulted in the death of a civilian. This is chargeable under the UCMJ as a violation of Article 128 (assault) which constitutes the “co mmission of a serious offense” and is punishable by a bad conduct discharge and up to six months of imprisonment if adjudicated by a Courts Martial. The Applicant was properly advised of his intended administrative separation due to misconduct by the commission of a serious offense and civil conviction. During this processing the Applicant elected to waive all rights . After ensuring proper processing the discharge authority directed the Applicant’s discharge with a service characterization of general (under honorable conditions) due to misconduct by civilian conviction . The Applicant’s conduct reflects hi s willful failure to meet the requirements of his contract with the U.S. Navy and falls far short of that required for an upgrade in the characterization of service.

With regard to the narrative reason, the Applicant was notified of his intended admini strative discharge by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense and misconduct due to civilian conviction. The Commanding Officer, USS HARRY S. TRUMAN ( CVN-75 ) chose to discharge the Applicant locally by reason of civilian conviction. This was proper at the time of issuance, however based upon the appeals court ruling of 20060616 the civilian conviction is no longer a proper reason for discharge. The Applicant admitted to the assault and violation of UCMJ Article 128 and was properly notified and processed for misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense during his administrative discharge. Therefore, the Board determined that the narrative reason shall change to MISCONDUCT (SERIOUS OFFENSE) .


Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A. The Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 12, effective 28 July 2005 until Present, Article 1910-144, Separation by Reason of Misconduct - Civilian Conviction.
B . Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 11, effective
26 April 2005 until Present, Article 1910-142, SEPARATION BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT - COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE .
 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 .
D . 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 128 .

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 | 2013_Navy | ND1300449

    Original file (ND1300449.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. ” 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. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801215

    Original file (ND0801215.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Service Record, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the ” 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1100019

    Original file (MD1100019.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. ” 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. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities.

  • USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1500227

    Original file (MD1500227.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities. Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, and discharge process, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall remain GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS) and the narrative reason for separation shall remain MISCONDUCT. ” Additional Reviews : After a document...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900955

    Original file (ND0900955.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    By a majority vote of 5-0, the Board determined the characterization of service received, “Under Other Than Honorable Conditions, ” and the narrative reason for the discharge; “Commission of a Serious Offense,” shall remain as issued considering the length of service 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200067

    Original file (ND1200067.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant contends his record of service warrants an upgrade. The civilian conviction provided the preponderance of the evidence that he committed a serious offense, he elected an ASB, the ASB determined he committed the offenses and recommended a General discharge, and the Separation Authority reviewed the findings and ordered the Applicant to be discharged. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1500193

    Original file (ND1500193.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, and discharge process, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall remain UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS and the narrative reason for separation shall remain MISCONDUCT (SERIOUS OFFENSE). ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800673

    Original file (ND0800673.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request: Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USNR (DEP)19891207 - 19900415Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 19900416Period of enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:19930917Length of Service: Yrs Mths08 DysEducation Level: Age at Enlistment:AFQT: 57Highest Rank/Rate:ANEvaluation marks:Performance: 4.0(2) Behavior:4.0(2)OTA: 4.0Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):Periods of UA/CONF:...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800612

    Original file (ND0800612.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Violation of Article 128 constitutes the “commission of a serious offense”, which forms the basis for discharge in this case. 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,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901248

    Original file (ND0901248.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant, through his counsel, requested a change on the Applicant’s DD Form 214, block 26 (separation code) and block 28 (narrative reason for separation) to support separation due to completion of his active obligated service. The Board determined this issue is without merit and 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,...