Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800649
Original file (ND0800649.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-EMFA, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20080205
Characterization of Service Received:
Narrative Reason for Discharge:
Authority for Discharge: MILPERSMAN

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

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
 Inactive: US N R (DEP)      20010510 - 20010704              Active:
Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Enlistment: 20010705      Period of enlistment : Years Extension          Date of Discharge: 20050429
Length of Service : Yrs Mths 25 D ys      Education Level:         Age at Enlistment:       AFQT: 32
Highest Rank /Rate : EMFN   Evaluation marks: Performance: NFIR       Behavior: NFIR    OTA: NFIR
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJPs :    
         20040422 : Art(s) 92 (Failure to obey an order or regulation); 107 (False official statement); 128 (Assault cummated by a battery) . Awarded - Susp -

Retention Warnings: .
         20040429 : For CO’s NJP of 20040422, for violation of U CMJ, Ar ticle 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation, to wit: providing alcohol to a minor); Article 107 and Article 128 .

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. Characterization unjust based on in service performance for 3.9 years .

Decision

Date: 20 08 0516             Location: Washington D.C         R epresentation :

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

 Issue 1 ( ). The Applicant contends the characterization of his discharge was unjust and therefore should be upgraded based on his performance during the 3.9 years of active duty service. The NDRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an Applicant's discharge, can upgrade the characterization of service if such a change is warranted. Despite the Applicant ’s recei pt of letters of commendation and promot ion to petty officer third class during this enlistment, his re cord was marred b y the following miscond uct as evidenced by his own admission: f ou ght with a shipmate while onboard the USS RONALD REAGAN and secur ed the lights to the personnel department as a joke and was sent to the brig for 10-12 days. On 20050405, the Applicant requested discharge for the good of the service to escape trial by court-martial. In the request the Applicant noted his counsel had fully explained the elements of the offenses for which he was charged and that he was guilty of the offenses. He further certified a complete understanding of the negative consequences of his actions and that the characterization of service could be under other than honorable conditions. The evidence of record does not demonstrate the Applicant was not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions. Therefore, the Board has denied rel ief.
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, Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found

Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), re-issued October 2002, effective 22 August 2002 until 30 May 2005, 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 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 107 , False official statement .



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

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900326

    Original file (MD0900326.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB is not authorized to consider the Applicant’s upgrade request based on this Issue.The Applicant was referred to a SPCM and the NDRB determined the awarded discharge was appropriate and an upgrade would be inappropriate. The record shows the command acted within regulations and the specifics of the Applicant’s plea agreement; an upgrade would be inappropriate.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record, Discharge Process...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900548

    Original file (MD0900548.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB therefore determined an upgrade would be inappropriate.For the edification of the Applicant, the NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found Pertinent Regulation/Law A. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101118

    Original file (ND1101118.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Representation: NONE By a vote of the Characterization shall .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.In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101346

    Original file (ND1101346.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 23 April 2003, the Applicant’s command submitted a waiver request for retention of the Applicant in the Navy (in lieu of alcohol rehabilitation treatment failure) to the Commander, Navy Personnel Command (PERSCOM). The Applicant’s command requested he be retained in the Navy and given another chance to complete alcohol rehabilitation and continue his enlistment in the Navy. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900358

    Original file (MD0900358.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Marine Corps Separations and Retirement Manual (MCO P1900.16F) directs that Marines separated upon completion of required active service be given a “General (Under Honorable Conditions)” characterization of service when their average proficiency and conduct marks are below 3.0 and 4.0, respectively. The Board determined the characterization of service received, “General (Under Honorable Conditions)”, was an appropriate characterization considering the length of service and the UCMJ...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800444

    Original file (ND0800444.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Awarded - Susp - Retention Warnings:NFIR 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1401149

    Original file (MD1401149.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. Relief denied.Summary: After...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801588

    Original file (ND0801588.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request: Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USNR (DEP) 19901220 - 1991224 Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 19902225Period of Enlistment: Years Extension Date of Discharge: 19930916Length of Service: Years Months22 Days Education Level: Age at Enlistment: AFQT: 91 Highest Rank/Rate: RM3 Evaluation Marks: Performance: NFIR Behavior: NFIR OTA: NFIRAwards and Decorations (per DD 214): Rifle...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801872

    Original file (ND0801872.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB determined the awarded discharge was appropriate 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, the Board found 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0800391

    Original file (MD0800391.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ” 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 has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities. With respect to a discharge adjudged by a court-martial, the action of the NDRB is restricted to upgrades based on clemency.