Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800683
Original file (ND0800683.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-ADAR, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20080303
Characterization of Service Received:
Narrative Reason for Discharge:
Authority for Discharge: MILPERSMAN 3640420

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

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive: US N R (DEP)      19881216 - 19890424              Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment: 19890425      Period of E nlistment : Years Extension   Date of Discharge: 19940223
Length of Service : Yrs M on ths 05 D a ys   Education Level:         Age at Enlistment:       AFQT: 59
Highest Rank /Rate : ADAN   Evaluation M arks: Performance: 3.6 ( 4 )    Behavior: 3.7 ( 4 )         OTA: 3.65
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): NDSM

Period of C ONF : 19930412-19930506 (24 DAYS)

NJPs :    
19910531 : Art icle 91 (Failed to obey lawful order) ,
         Article 91 (Disrespectful in language) .
Awarded : . Susp - .

SPCMs:  
19930412 : Art icle 80 (Attem pt to steal) (3 specifications),
         Article 121 (Steal a visa credit card and checkbook),
         Article 123 (Uttering certain checks) (10 specifications) .
 Sentence : RIR E-1 CONF FOR 30 DAYS BCD .

Types of Documents Submitted/reviewed

 Related to Military Service:      DD 214:          Service and/or Medical Record:            Other Records:

         - Record of Trial of 12 April 1993.

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. Unfair to get BCD near the end of her contract.
2. Isolated incident.
 3. Cooperation with civilian authorities in the trial of another person involved in this case.
 4 . Post-service conduct.

Decision

Date: 20080915             Location: Washington D.C .        R epresentation :

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
 By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall COURT-MARTIAL .
Discussion
Issue 1-3: (Clemency) RELIEF NOT WARRANTED. In response to the Applicant’s clemency request, relevant and material facts stated in a court-martial specification are presumed by the NDRB to be established facts. With respect to a discharge adjudged by a court-martial case, 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. The Applicant’s case was considered under the pertinent standards of equity to determine if any factors in this particular case merited clemency. The Board determined the Applicant’s discharge was awarded equitably by the court. The court had knowledge of the Applicant’s record of service, including a prior Non-Judicial Punishment for a violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Article 91, and was aware of the end date of her contract. The Board was unable to consider the Applicant’s claim she cooperated with civilian prosecutors in the trial of another person involved in this offense because she submitted no evidence for the Board to consider. The Board determined an upgrade, based on clemency, would be inappropriate.

Issue 4: ( Clemency ) RELIEF NOT WARRANTED. In determining whether clemency is appropriate, the NDRB is authorized to consider outstanding 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. Examples of verifiable documentation that should be provided for consideration by the Board for post-service upgrades include, but is not limited to: evidence of continuing educational pursuits; continuous long-term employment records; documentation of community service or church involvement; certification of non-involvement with civil authorities; financial stability or evidence of good standing with credit card companies or other financial institutions; and credible evidence of a substance-free lifestyle. However, the Applicant is advised 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 conduct warrants clemency. The Applicant submitted evidence with her DD293 Application demonstrating employment and participation in education and training. While this does demonstrate some degree of good conduct, the Board determined this does not meet the high standard required to warrant a clemency upgrade from a Bad Conduct Discharge.

After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Service and Medical Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, t he Board found clemency was not warranted and the sentence awarded the Applicant at h er court-martial was appropriate for the offense s he committed.











Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 5, effective 5 March 1993 until 2 October 1996, Article 3640420, DISCHARGE OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL ADJUDGED BY SENTENCE OF 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 s 80, 91, 121, and 123 .

 .

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 or is referred to a court martial 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 other medical related reasons. 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 special 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. The NDRB does not have the jurisdictional authority to review a discharge or dismissal resulting from a general court-martial.

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 | ND0700286

    Original file (ND0700286.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a thorough review of the Applicant’s record, issues submitted, and post service accomplishments, the Board determined that clemency was not warranted and that the sentence awarded the Applicant at his court-martial was appropriate for the offense that he committed. 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 Summary...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0701121

    Original file (ND0701121.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request: Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change: MERCY, CLEMENCY Applicant’s Issues: 1. If a former member has been discharged for more than 15 years, has already been granted 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. Additionally, the NDRB does not have the authority to change a...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700342

    Original file (ND0700342.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a thorough review of the Applicant’s record, issues submitted, and post service accomplishments, the Board determined that clemency was not warranted and that the sentence awarded the Applicant at his court-martial was appropriate for the offenses he committed. If a former member has been discharged for more than 15 years, has already been granted a personal appearance hearing or has otherwise exhausted his opportunities before the NDRB, the Applicant may petition the Board for...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0701076

    Original file (ND0701076.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change: Applicant’s Issues:1. After a thorough review of the Applicant’s record, issues submitted, and post service accomplishments, the Board determined that clemency was not warranted and that the sentence awarded the Applicant at his court-martial was appropriate for the offenses he committed. If a former member has been discharged for more than 15 years, has already been granted a personal appearance hearing or has...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700183

    Original file (ND0700183.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s case was considered under the pertinent standards of equity to determine if any factors in this particular case merited clemency. After a thorough review of the Applicant’s record, issues submitted, and post service accomplishments, the Board determined that clemency was not warranted and that the sentence awarded the Applicant at his court-martial was appropriate for the offenses he committed. The Manual for Courts-Martial authorizes the award of a punitive discharge if...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700056

    Original file (ND0700056.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Award: Forfeiture of $150.00 for 1 month, restriction to SSC BEQ and extra duty for 14 days.19901121: Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (poor military performance, by wrongfully using reproachful words, wrongfully going on liberty without your armed forces liberty pass, by assaulting another service member, by wrongfully communicating a threat to sexually assault another service member), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101600

    Original file (ND1101600.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB determined that clemency based on this issue was not warranted. 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 .Since fifteen years from the date of the Applicant’s discharge have elapsed, he is not eligible for a personal appearance hearing with...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0701078

    Original file (ND0701078.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. A request for a waiver can be submitted during the processing of a formal application for reenlistment through a recruiter. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700008

    Original file (ND0700008.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Article 121: Wrongful appropriate. Article 121: Wrongful appropriate. 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, Articles92 (Disobeying a lawful written order), 95 (Disorderly conduct), 107 (False official statement), 112a (wrongful use of a controlled substance), 113 (Misbehavior of a sentinel) and 134 (Disorderly conduct).

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0601085

    Original file (ND0601085.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    19920818: U. S. Navy-Marine Corps Court of Military Review, approved both the findings and the sentence of the Applicant’s Special Court-Martial case of 19920111. Elements of Discharge: [BCD] Record of Trial Complete: Date Charges Preferred: 19911223 Date Charges Referred to Special Court-Martial: 19911224 Trial Date: 19920111Applicant requested BCD: Date Applicant to Confinement: 19920127Date Applicant from Confinement: 19920318Date Applicant to Voluntary Appellate Leave: 19920406NMCCA...