Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801238
Original file (ND0801238.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-SH1, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20080513
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) 19870519 - 19870618                 Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment: 20021122     Period of E nlistment : Years Extension         Date of Discharge: 20040510
Length of Service : 16 Y ear s M onth s 22 D a ys Education Level:          Age at Enlistment:     AFQT: NFIR
Highest Rank /Rate : SH1/E6         Evaluation M arks: Performance: NFIR       Behavior: NFIR    OTA: NFIR
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): Rifle , Pistol , (4), , (5), , (2), , (4)

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJPs :

S CMs :

SPCMs:

C C :
20030923 : Offense: Assault with deadly weapon (felony) .
Sentence : NFIR

Retention Warnings:

                                    Types of Documents Submitted /reviewed

Related 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 Representat ion :    From Congress m ember :

Other Documentation (Describe) :
                           - Trial transcript





Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), re-issued October 2002, effective 22 August 2002 until 25 April 2005, Article 1910-142, SEPARATION BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT - COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE.
B. 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 128 .

C . 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 .





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

Applicant’s Issues

 1. RE Code/Service b enefits .
2. Isolated i ncident.
3 . Record of service.

Decision

Date : 20 08 0927             Location: Washington D.C .        R epresentation :

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
 By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall MISCONDUCT .
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 and Service Benefits , re garding .

Issue 2: (Equity) RELIEF NOT WARRANTED. The Applicant stated his discharge was based on one isolated incident . For the edification of the Applicant, d espite a service member’s prior record of se rvice certain serious offenses, even though isolate d, warrant separation from the n aval service in order to maintain proper order and discipline. Additionally , an administrative discharge is not punishment. The decision to administratively discharge a service member is made independently of , and does not require adjudication at , a court-martial or NJP . The characterization of service is a description of the total service provided during the member’s enlistment.

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 service was marred by his civilian charge of assault with a deadly weapon, which constitutes the “commission of a serious offense”, the discharge basis in this case. This specific violation is punishable by a dishonorable discharge and up to 8 years of imprisonment if adjudicated by a Courts- Martial. The command did not pursue a punitive discharge but opted for an administratively discharge and the command conducted an administrative board on the Applicant.

W hen the quality of a member’s service has met the standards of accepted conduct and performance of duty for military personnel , it is appropriate to characterize that service under “H onorable ” conditions. A “General (Under Honorable Conditions)” is appropriate if the member’s service has been honest and faithful but significant negative aspects of the member’s conduct or performance outweighs positive aspects of the member’s military record. T he Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of service, reflects the civilian charge of assault with a deadly weapon and constitutes a significant negative aspect of the member’s conduct which outweighs the positive aspects of his record. The Board determined an upgrade would be inappropriate.

Issue 3 : (Equity) RELIEF NOT WARRANTED. The Applicant states his record of service mitigates h is misconduct. The Board reviews the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge individually, on a case-by-case basis. If such a review reveals an impropriety or inequity, relief is in order. Regulations permit relief on equitable grounds if the Applicant’s discharge is inconsistent with standards of discipline of the Naval service. There is credible evidence in the record the Applicant violated the Naval Service values of honor, courage, and commitment. 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. W hen the quality of a member’s service has met the standards of accepted conduct and performance of duty for military personnel , it is appropriate to characterize that service under “H onorable ” conditions. A “General (Under Honorable Conditions)” is appropriate if the member’s service has been honest and faithful but significant negative aspects of the member’s conduct or performance outweighs positive aspects of the


member’s military record. The Applicant’s civilian charge of assault with a deadly weapon is considered a significant negative aspect of his conduct which outweighs the positive aspect of his military record. The Board determined 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 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 | 2011_Navy | ND1101366

    Original file (ND1101366.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. The Applicant contends his...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600934

    Original file (ND0600934.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Decisional Issues Equity – Isolated incident Documentation In addition to the service and medical records, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant’s DD Form 214 (Member 4) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 20010327 - 20010615ELS USNR...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800609

    Original file (ND0800609.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Administrative board then voted 2-1 that the misconduct warranted separation with a characterization of service as under other than honorable conditions. In accordance with regulation, when separation processing is warranted for more than one reason the service member shall be processed for all valid causes. Violations of UCMJ Articles 107 and 123 constitute the “commission of a serious offense”, the discharge basis in this case.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801226

    Original file (ND0801226.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 conduct mitigates the reason for the characterization of discharge.The Applicant provided a personal statement and as evidence of post-service accomplishments. The Board determined the characterization of service received, “General (Under Honorable Conditions)”, was an...

  • USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1200787

    Original file (MD1200787.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    This allegation was based on a post-Administrative Separation Board conversation the Applicant had with a member of the Administrative Separation Board, a Gunnery Sergeant who had voiced that the Applicant may have received a recommendation for a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge if the personal weapon involved in his civil arrest had not been illegal. The respondent will be separated from the U.S. Marine Corps with an Under Other Than Honorable discharge by reason of...

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0500412

    Original file (MD0500412.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    “Equity Issue:Based on our review of evidentiary record and on behalf of this former member, we request that the Board also consider provisions of SECNAVINST 5420.174D, Part IV, Paragraph 403 m (7), as it pertains to post-service conduct, in assessing the merits of this application.In accordance with Title 32, CFR, section 724.116 and SECNAVINST 5420.174D, Part I, Paragraph 1.20, The American Legion submits to the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB or Board) the above issue and following...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600124

    Original file (ND0600124.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND06-00124 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20051025. The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. As of this time, the Applicant has not provided any post-service documentation for the Board to consider.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801661

    Original file (ND0801661.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant has requested an upgrade to his discharge characterization to “Honorable”. ” 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 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801470

    Original file (ND0801470.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of ServicePrior Service: Inactive: USNR (DEP)NFIRActive: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 19930216Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:19960619Length of Service: Years Months04 DaysEducation Level: Age at Enlistment:AFQT: NFIRHighest Rank/Rate:NFIREvaluationMarks:Performance:NFIRBehavior:NFIROTA: NFIRAwards and Decorations (per DD 214):Periods of UA/CONF:...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600045

    Original file (ND0600045.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Therefore, based on the facts of this case, I direct AT3 H_ to be administratively separated from the naval service with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge due to misconduct –civilian conviction, with a RE-4 separation code.” The names, and votes of the members of the Board are recorded on the original of this document and may be obtained from the...