Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800209
Original file (ND0800209.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-GSMFA, 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)      20030827 - 20040105             
Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Enlistment: 20040116                        Period of enlistment : 4 Years            Date of Discharge: 20051018
Length of Service : Yrs Mths 13 D ys      Education Level: NA                Age at Enlistment: 19     AFQT: 56
Highest Rank /Rate : GSMFN          Evaluation marks: Performance: 2.0 ( 1 )    Behavior: 3.0 ( 1 )                  OTA: 1.83 (1)
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): and

NJP :      20050713 : Article 86 (unauthorized absence); Awarded – RIR, EPD, and RESTR. Susp -
         20051003 : Art icles 89 (disrespect), 90 (disobey a commissioned officer), 91 (insubordinate conduct , 3 specifications ),   112a (wrongful use of a controlled substance), 117 (provoking speech or gestures, 2 specifications) , and 134     (2 specifications, disorderly conduct, drunken incapacitation for duties) . Awarded - , , and

Retention Warnings: 20050713 : For violations of UCMJ Article 86 .

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.

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 .
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 .

The Applicant ’s service was marred by a retention warning and two nonjudicial punishments for violations of UCMJ Articles 86 (unauthorized absence), 89 (disrespect toward a commissioned officer), 90 (disobeying a commissioned officer), 91 (insubordinate conduct) , 112a (wrongful use of a controlled substance), 117 (provoking speech of gestures), a nd 1 34 (2 specifications, drunk and disorderly, and drunken incapacitation for duty) . These nonjudicial 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 rights to consult counsel and 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 1910-140 the separation authority directed the Applicant’s discharge by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct with a service characterization of under other than honorable conditions . N othing indicates that the Applicant’s discharge was in any way inconsistent with the standards of discipline in the United States Navy. A n under other than honorable conditions 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. For the information of the Applicant, v iolations of UCMJ Article s 89, 90, 91 and 11 2a carry a penalty of a dishonorable discharge and up to five years of imprisonment for each specification if adjudicated by a court martial. The Applicant’s conduct reflects his 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 his characterization of service.

In reviewing discharges, the Board presume s regularity in the conduct of g overnment al affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence ( to include evidence submitted by the Applicant ) to rebut the presumption . After a thorough review of the available evidence to include the Applicant’s s ummary of s ervice, m edical and s ervice r ecord e ntries, d ischarge p rocess and evid ence submitted by the Applicant the Board found that

Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 11, effective 26 April 2005 until Present, Article 1910-140, SEPARATION BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT - 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 .

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 89, 90, 91, and 112a .


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 | 2009_Navy | ND0900950

    Original file (ND0900950.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    By a unanimous vote of 5-0, the Board determined the characterization of service received, “Under Other Than Honorable Conditions,” and the narrative reason for the discharge; “Misconduct,” 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, theBoard found ADDENDUM: Information for...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0701192

    Original file (MD0701192.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request: Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USMCR (DEP)20040810 - 20050124Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20050125Period of enlistment: Years MonthsDate of Discharge:20050920Length of Service: Yrs Mths26 DysEducation Level: Age at Enlistment:AFQT: 42MOS: 9971 Highest Rank: Fitness reports: Proficiency/Conduct marks (# of occasions): 4.2(1)/4.2(1) Awards and Decorations (per DD 214): Rifle...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100604

    Original file (ND1100604.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s record of service during her enlistment period reflects one NAVPERS 1070/613 retention-counseling warning being issued. Furthermore, the Applicant’s service record documents four nonjudicial punishments (NJPs) for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), specifically: Article 86 (Absent without leave, 4 specifications of unauthorized absence); Article 87 (Missing movement); Article 89 (Disrespect toward a superior commissioned officer); Article 91...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0701169

    Original file (MD0701169.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801946

    Original file (MD0801946.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    However, the Board did determine, by a majority vote of 3-2, to change the Applicant’s character of service to General (Under Honorable Conditions).Relief granted.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, medical and record entries, and discharge process, the Board found the discharge was proper and equitable at the at the time of discharge. However, based on his post-service efforts, the Board deemed it fit to award an...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00412

    Original file (ND04-00412.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions. _______________________________________________________________________ In accordance with 32 C.F.R., section 724.166, and SECNAVINST 5420.174C, enclosure (1), paragraph 1.16, The American Legion submits to the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB or Board) the above issue and following statement in supplement to the Applicant’s...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800433

    Original file (ND0800433.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Types of Documents SubmittedRelated 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 Representation: From Member of Congress: Other Documentation (Describe) DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW...

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801201

    Original file (MD0801201.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Suspended: SCM: SPCM: CC: Retention Warning Counseling: - 19900504: For continued failure to be at section on time- 19900604: For not being at his appointed place of duty, barracks 574 working party on 19910521 - 1990109: For violation of UCMJ Article 91, disrespect to an NCO- 19920106: For continued misconduct and poor performance NDRB Documentary Review Conducted (date): 20000622 NDRB Documentary Review Docket Number: MD00-00091 NDRB Documentary Review Findings: NO CHANGE WARRANTED Types...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700067

    Original file (MD0700067.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Elements of Discharge: [INVOLUNTARY] Date Notified: 19940831Basis for Discharge: due to: Least Favorable Characterization: Commanding Officer’s Intended Recommendation: Date Applicant Responded to Notification: 19940902 Rights Elected at Notification:Consult with Counsel Obtain Copies of DocumentsSubmit Statement(s) (date) Administrative Board (19941011)Commanding Officer Recommendation (date): (19940902)SJA review (date): (19941114)Separation Authority (date): COMMANDING GENERAL, 3D MARINE...

  • 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,...