Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800473
Original file (ND0800473.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-MS1, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20071130
Characterization of Service Received:
Narrative Reason for Discharge:
Authority for Discharge: MILPERSMAN 3630605

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


Summary of Service

Prior Service:
 Inactive: US N R (DEP)      19830217 - 19831221               Active: 19831222 – 19880112 (HON)
                                                                                 19880113 – 19950111 (HON)
                                                                       
Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Enlistment: 19950112               Period of enlistment : 2 Years + 10 month e xtension       Date of Discharge: 19970828
Length of Service : 02 Yrs 07 Mths 16 D ys          Education Level: 12       Age at Enlistment: 29     AFQT: 65
Highest Rank /Rate : MS1             Evaluation marks: 5.0 Scale - Performance: 4.0 ( 2 )        Behavior: 3.0 ( 2 )         OTA: 4.0 (2)
                                    Evaluation marks: 4.0 Scale - Performance: 4.0 ( 1 )       Behavior: 4.0 ( 1 )        OTA: 4.0 (1)

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): (4), (2), (2), , , (2), and (3)

C C :       19970306 : Offense: Grand Theft ; placed on “pre-trial intervention” similar to probation and includes the admission of guilt; s entence – 100 hours of community service and no additional criminal activity for 2 years.


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)


Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

The NDRB did note an administrative error on the original DD Form 214:

          “ continuous honorable service from 88 JAN 13 - 95 JAN 11 ”
        
The NDRB will recommend to the C ommander, Navy Personnel Command , that the DD 214 be corrected as appropriate.


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

Applicant’s Issues

 1. To reflect actual honorable accomplishments in 13.5 years of service.


Decision

Date: 20 08 0327             Location: Washington D.C         R epresentation :

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

 Issue 1 ( ): The Applicant requested that his honorable service be reflected. 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 current 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 under other than honorable conditions d ischarge 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 service was marred by his arrest and subsequent admission of guilt to grand theft. Under the UCMJ this would be a violation of Article 121 which is defined as the “co mmission of a serious offense” and is punishable by a dishonorable discharge and up to 5 years 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. During this processing the Applicant elected his right to consult an attorney and to have his case heard before an administrative board. The Administrative Board voted 3-0 that he had committed misconduct by the commission of a serious offense and recommended his discharge with an overall characterization of service as under other than honorable. The Administrative Board recommended that the separation be suspended for 12 months. The Applicant’s Commanding Officer agreed with the Administrative Boards decision except for the suspended separation and recommended to BUPERS the Applicant’s immediate discharge with an overall characterization of service as under other than honorable. After ensuring proper processing in accordance with MILPERSMAN 3630605 the discharge authority directed the Applicant’s discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense . 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.

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 14, effective 03 Oct 96 until 971212, Article 3630605, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT – COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE.
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 121 .



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 | 1999_Navy | ND99-00471

    Original file (ND99-00471.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    970228: An Administrative Discharge Board, based upon a preponderance of the evidence and by unanimous vote, found that the applicant had committed a serious offense, that the misconduct warranted separation, and by a vote of 2 to 1 recommended retention. Relief not warranted.The applicant’s second issue requested the NDRB review the applicant’s discharge and determine whether a vote to retain by an officer board was overturned by civilian authority on grounds of political correctness and...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200290

    Original file (ND1200290.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Based on the offenses committed by the Applicant, command administratively processed for separation. Relief 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 and the narrative reason for separation shall remain .The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing for a period of fifteen years from the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00837

    Original file (ND03-00837.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-00837 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030409. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. 010216: An Administrative Discharge Board, based upon a preponderance of the evidence and by unanimous vote, found that the Applicant had committed a serious offense and civil conviction, that the misconduct warranted separation, and recommended discharge under...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00901

    Original file (ND99-00901.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND99-00901 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 990622, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable and the reason for the discharge be changed to convenience of the government. Please see Document #2 enclosures from my naval record.5. Therefore, the applicant’s discharge will be upgraded to Honorable and the reason changed to Secretarial Authority.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0902314

    Original file (ND0902314.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Based on the offense committed by the Applicant, his command administratively processed him for separation. The Applicant was not awarded a punitive discharge but separated via the more lenient administrative discharge.After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the NDRB discerned no inequity in the characterization of the Applicant’s service.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001415

    Original file (ND1001415.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/To Congress member: Pertinent Regulation/Law A. The Applicant’s record...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700333

    Original file (ND0700333.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board construed this issue to mean that, had the Applicant not extended his enlistment, he would have reached his EAS and been discharged for that reason, with a characterization based on his service record, rather than for misconduct and an other than honorable characterization of service. As of this time, the Applicant has not provided sufficient post-service documentation to consider mitigating the misconduct that resulted in the characterization of discharge.In reviewing discharges,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00936

    Original file (ND99-00936.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND99-00936 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 990702, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable and the reason for the discharge be changed to Secretarial Authority. 970506: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.970521: Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00610

    Original file (ND02-00610.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00610 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020403, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable and the reason for the discharge be changed to completed required service. Issue 1: The Applicant requested the Board upgrade his discharge to honorable based upon the fact that he believes misappropriating a box of crab legs does not justify a General discharge. For the record, the Applicant was found by an...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0902265

    Original file (ND0902265.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall .Discussion The NDRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge, is authorized to change the character of service and the reason for discharge if such change is warranted. The Applicant could have produced evidence as stated in the Post-Service Conduct paragraph in the addendum with the full understanding that completion of these items alone does not guarantee an upgrade.Relief denied.Summary: After a...