Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800573
Original file (ND0800573.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-AZAN, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20008012
Characterization of Service Received:
Narrative Reason for Discharge: - COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE
Authority for Discharge: MILPERSMAN

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

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
 Inactive: US N R (DEP)      20040722 - 20040729             
Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Enlistment: 20040730               Period of enlistment : 4 Years            Date of Discharge: 20051110
Length of Service : Yrs Mths 10 D ys      Education Level: 12                Age at Enlistment:       AFQT: 82
Highest Rank /Rate : AZAN   Evaluation marks: Performance: 4.0 ( 3 )    Behavior: 2.0 ( 3 )                  OTA: 2.94 (3)
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): , , , and

NJP :      20050907 : Violation of UCMJ Art icles 86 (unauthorized absence), 92 (failure to obey), 107 ( false official statement), 111 (reckless driving), and 112 (drunk on duty); a warded - and
        

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. Feel as though punished twice for same offense i.e. NJP followed by SARP then discharged
2. Post service conduct – attending a university and employed


Decision

Date: 20 08 0404             Location: Washington D.C         R epresentation :

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
 By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall MISCONDUCT - COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE .
Discussion

 Issue 1 ( ): The Applicant contends that his discharge was inequitable because he was punished twice for the same offense. P er regulation t he decision to administratively separate a service member is made independently of the imposition of NJP. The Applicant was taken to nonjudicial punishment on 20050907 for violations of UCMJ Art icles 86 (unauthorized absence), 92 (failure to obey), 107 (false official statement), 111 (reckless driving), and 112 (drunk on duty ) . For this misbehavior the Applicant was awarded forfeiture of pay and reduction in rank . Subsequently the commanding officer determined that it was in the best interest of the U.S. Navy to process the Applicant for administrative separation. When a member is processed for administrative separation all reasons for separation must be included in the administrative process, this includes all nonjudicial punishments, civilian convictions, court martials, retention warnings, and coun ce lings during the current enlistment. With this information the discharge authority makes the decision of retention or separation and determines the reason for separation and the overall characterization of the member’s service.

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 ) 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 NJP for violations of UCMJ Article s 86 (unauthorized absence), 92 (failure to obey), 107 (false official statement), 111 (drunk driving), and 112 (drunk on duty) . Each violation of Articles 92 , 107, 111, and 1 12 constitutes the “co mmission of a serious offense” which is punishable by a dishonorable discharge and up to five years of imprisonment if adjudicated by a Courts Martial. After ensuring proper processing in accordance with MILPERSMAN 1910-142 the discharge authority directed the Applicant’s discharge under other than honorable conditions. The record supports the commission of a serious offense for which the Applicant was administratively discharged. T hat se paration was appropriate and a general (under honorable conditions) characterization of service is warranted .

Issue 2 ( ): The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the re characterization 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 life subsequent to leaving the servi ce. Normally, to permit relief a procedural impropriety or inequity must have been found to have existed during the period of enlistment in question. O utstanding 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 stated to the board that he is now enrolled in college and is employed as doc umentation of his 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, and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities. The Board determined that the documentation provided by the Applicant did not mitigate the misconduct which resulted in the Applicant’s discharge and characterization of his 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 1910-142, SEPARATION 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 s of the UCMJ, Article s 92, 111, and 112 .



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 | 2007_Navy | ND0700214

    Original file (ND0700214.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s service was marred by four nonjudicial punishments and two retention warning for violations of UCMJ Articles 86 (unauthorized absence, 6 specifications), 87 (missing movement), 90 (willfully disobeying a superior commissioned officer), 91 (insubordinate conduct, 2 specifications), 92 (failure to obey, 3 specifications), 107 (false official statements), 111 (drunk operation of a motor vehicle), 112 (drunk on watch), and 134 (disorderly conduct and communicating a threat). ...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801842

    Original file (ND0801842.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Record of service. The Applicant is advised that completion of these items alone does not guarantee the upgrade of an unfavorable discharge, as each discharge is reviewed by the Board on a case by case basis to determine if post-service accomplishments help demonstrate previous in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member’s overall character.The Applicant has requested a discharge characterization upgrade to “Honorable”. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801866

    Original file (ND0801866.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. Record of service. ” 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.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501320

    Original file (ND0501320.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to entry level separation or uncharacterized. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant’s DD Form 214 Applicant’s DD Form 215 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 19990630 – 19991129 COG Active: USN 19991130...

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801960

    Original file (MD0801960.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall COURT-MARTIAL.Discussion :().The Applicant contends he deserves better than a “Bad Conduct” discharge after serving many years in the Marine Corps and taking part in Operation Iraqi Freedom in 2003. ” 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. If a former member has been discharged for...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801920

    Original file (ND0801920.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: NONEActive: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20021219Age at Enlistment:Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20050629Highest Rank/Rate:AEANLength of Service: Inactive: 00 Years 06Months15 DaysActive: Years Months25 DaysEducation Level:AFQT: 75EvaluationMarks:Performance:NFIRBehavior:NFIROTA: NFIRAwards and Decorations (per DD 214):NDSM...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501558

    Original file (ND0501558.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I was discharged from the Navy under a general (under honorable conditions) discharge characterization as a result of “the commission of a serious offense”. The command has provided various forms of assistance and help for his alcohol problems; however, AA N_ (Applicant) continues to have alcohol related incidents.” PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged on 20040820 by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700131

    Original file (ND0700131.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Discharge Improper2. The Board determined that the documentation provided by the Applicant did not mitigate the misconduct that resulted in the characterization of discharge. With respect to a discharge adjudged by a court-martial, the action of the NDRB is restricted to upgrades based on clemency.

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900400

    Original file (MD0900400.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant is advised that completion of these items alone does not guarantee the upgrade of an unfavorable discharge, as each discharge is reviewed by the Board on a case by case basis to determine if post-service accomplishments help demonstrate previous in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member’s overall character.Besides the Applicants statement on the DD Form 293 there was no post service documentation provided. After a thorough review of the available...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201115

    Original file (ND1201115.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Basic Rule 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: DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW...