Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801040
Original file (ND0801040.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-ITSA, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20080408
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: USNR (DEP)     20021211 - 20031204 - Refused to ship.           
Inactive: US N R (DEP)      20040416 - 20040428              Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment: 20040429      Period of E nlistment : Years Extension          Date of Discharge: 20070712
Length of Service : Yrs Mths 14 D ys      Education Level:         Age at Enlistment:       AFQT: 63
Highest Rank /Rate : ITSN   Evaluation marks: Performance: NFIR       Behavior: NFIR    OTA: NFIR
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): Rifle Pistol

Periods of UA : 20061 208 20070409 (4 m on ths , 2 days)

NJPs :    
20070531 : Art icle 86 (Unauthorized absence)
Awarded -

Types of Documents Submitted/reviewed

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) : References , includ ing t elephone listings .

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 of the UCMJ, Article 86



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

Applicant’s Issues

1. Reenlistment opportunities.
2. Mitigating circumstances lead to misconduct.
3 . Post service conduct.

Decision

Date : 20080829             Location: Washington D.C        R epresentation :

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall MISCONDUCT (SERIOUS OFFENSE) .

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 , specifically the paragraph concerning s , regarding .

: ( ) . The Applicant contends circumstances related to her child’s illness lead to her misconduct. 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. The Applicant’s record is marred by a non-judicial punishment for violation of the U niform C ode of M ilitary J ustice, Articles 86. Violations of Article 86 are considered serious offenses, punishable by punitive discharge and confinement if adjudicated by a special or general court-martial. The command did not pursue a punitive discharge , but opted instead for an administrative discharge with the least possible characterization of “Under Other Than Honorable Conditions. Taking into consideration the Applicant’s mitigating circumstances and the serious nature of the offense, the command determined an administrative discharge with a “General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization was most appropriate .

The Applicant states she requested a hardship discharge, due to child care issues, from her chain of command.
It was noted the Applicant stated she needed the hardship discharge due to both parents being deployed (the Board assumes the Applicant had received word her command would soon be deploying, and the same for the father’s command). She also states she filled out leave papers and was approved for leave to tend to her sick child. Upon a review of the members service record there was no evidence of a request for hardship discharge or mention of approved leave to tend to her sick child. Additionally, it was noted in the service record on DD Form 1966, Record of Milita ry Processing, dated April 2004, the Applicant already had a n established history of refusing to ship a s documented in her record; comment s contained on the DD Form 1966 stat e DEP discharged from Navy 031204 ; Refused to ship.” However, based on the lack of documented evidence to support the Applicant’s claim of a hardship discharge and/or approved leave, t he Board determined an upgrade would be inappropriate.

: ( ) . The Applicant contends she is entitled to a discharge upgrade because of her post-service conduct. The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. However, there is no law or regulation, which provides a discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in the civilian life subsequent to leaving the service. Outstanding post-service conduct, 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, is considered during Board reviews . Supporting documentation that could have been submitted for consideration by the Board include, but is not limited to: evidence of a verifiable long-term employment record ; evidence of a drug-free existence; verifiable documentation of educational pursuits; certification of non-involvement with civil authorities ; and documentation of financial stability or evidence of good standing with financial institutions or credit card company’s . The Applicant should be aware completion of these items alone does not guarantee an upgrade from an unfavorable discharge as each discharge is reviewed by the Board on a case-by-case basis to determine if post-service conduct mitigates the reason for the characterization of discharge. The Applicant provided no documentation for the Board to consider for review.



T o warrant an upgrade to “Honorable” the Applicant’s post service efforts need to be more encompassing. The Applicant could have produced additional evidence as stated in the above paragraph with the full understanding completion of these items alone
does not guarantee an upgrade. The Board determined, based on the lack of documentation provided, an upgrade based on post-service conduct would be inappropriate and the characterization of service received, “General (Under Honorable Conditions)”, was an appropriate characterization considering the limited time served and the nature of the UCMJ violation.

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 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 | 2008_Navy | ND0800578

    Original file (ND0800578.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Types of Documents Submitted/reviewedRelated 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900910

    Original file (ND0900910.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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.The Applicant’s record of service contained no documentation of misconduct, but in her case, the characterization of service should be the “type warranted by service record.” However, in the absence of the Applicant’s performance evaluations, the Board presumed regularity and found...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900811

    Original file (ND0900811.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: Substance Abuse: Criminal Records: Family/Personal Status: Community Service: References: Additional Statements: From Applicant: From Representation:From Congress member: Other Documentation: DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900216

    Original file (ND0900216.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: Substance Abuse: Criminal Records: Family/Personal Status: Community Service: References: Additional Statements: From Applicant: From Representation:From Congress member: Other Documentation: DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900418

    Original file (ND0900418.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 document requirements of DoD Instruction 1332.28, you may submit a complaint in accordance with...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101656

    Original file (ND1101656.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)19940107 - 19940123Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 19940124Age at Enlistment:Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20040115Highest Rank/Rate:HM3Length of Service:Year(s)Month(s) 06 Day(s)Education Level:AFQT: 65EvaluationMarks:Performance:NFIRBehavior:NFIROTA: NFIRAwards and Decorations (per DD 214):NONEPeriods of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101343

    Original file (ND1101343.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Upon conclusion of the hearing, the Senior Member of the ASB forwarded the findings to the Applicant’s Commanding Officer as follows: (By 3-0 vote) via a preponderance of the evidence, the Applicant committed Misconduct- Serious Offense and Misconduct- Civil Conviction; (By 3-0 vote) the Applicant should be separated from the Navy; (By 3-0 vote) the Applicant should receive an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge due to Misconduct.The Applicant was separated from the Navy on 28...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1002273

    Original file (ND1002273.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 date of discharge. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200594

    Original file (ND1200594.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)20101214 - 20110213Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20110214Age at Enlistment:Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20110314Highest Rank/Rate:SN/E1Length of Service:Year(s)Month(s) 01 Day(s)Education Level:AFQT: 94EvaluationMarks:Performance:NFIRBehavior:NFIROTA: NFIRAwards and Decorations (per DD 214):NONEPeriods...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301822

    Original file (ND1301822.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant contends she was dealing with the stress of the death of a child.The NDRB recognizes that serving in the military is challenging and dealing with the loss of a child is extraordinarily challenging.There was evidence in the Applicant’s medical record, as well as her Commanding Officer’s comments on the Applicant’sRecommendation for Administrative Separation to Commander Navy Region Mid-Atlantic, documenting that she lost her child a little more than a month prior to her...