Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801373
Original file (ND0801373.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-HN, USNR
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20080610
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: NONE                                      Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment: 19940403     Period of E nlistment : Years     Date of Discharge: 19980917
Length of Service : Inactive: Y ear s M onth s 28 D a ys    Active: Y ear s M onth s 16 D a ys
Education Level:        Age at Enlistment:      AFQT: 63
Highest Rank /Rate : HN    Evaluation M arks: Performance: 4.0 ( 2 )    Behavior: 1.0 ( 2 )        OTA: 3. 08
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):     

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP :
19971119 : Art icle 121 ( Larceny), 3 specifications. Extracted from Evaluation Report and Counseling Record dated
19980123. No further information found in service record.
Awarded : Susp ended :

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) :

Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 18, effective 12 December 1997 until 29 March 2000,
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 .


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

Applicant’s Issues

 1. Inequitable (improper) discharge .

Decision

Date : 20 08 1016        Location: Washington D.C .        R epresentation :

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

 : ( ) . The Applicant contends her discharge characterization was imp roper as it states the reason for discharge was misconduct, not because of physical problems which effected her physical readiness. 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, besides being a 3-time Physical Fitness Assessment (PFA) failure, was marred by a NJP for a violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 121 (Larceny and wrongful appropriation), 3 specifications, 10 months prior to her discharge.

The Applicant claims she was administratively separated based on being a three-time Phys ical Fitness Assess ment (PFA) failure, which is not a “ Commission of a Serious Offense ” . However, the evidence of record indicates she was discharged for the violation of Article 121 which is a “Commission of a Serious Offense” and is supported by her NJP and her DD-214.

The Applicant has requested an upgrade in her characterization to an “Honorable”. In order to rate an “Honorable” discharge, a member’s quality of a service has met the standards of accepted conduct and performance of duty for military personnel . 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 Board acknowledged the Article 121 violation was a significant negative aspect of the Applicant’s conduct but wasn’t significant to warrant an “Under Other Than Honorable Conditions”. The Board determined an upgrade to “ General (Under Honorable Conditions) ” would be appropriate .

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 foun d the discharge was proper but not equitable as reasoned above.


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 | 2010_Navy | ND1000373

    Original file (ND1000373.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    However, because of the 2 ½-year period from the commission of the serious offense to the time of discharge, the Board discerned inequity in the narrative reason for separation and voted unanimously to change the narrative reason for separationfrom Misconduct (Serious Offense) to Physical Standards.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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1400777

    Original file (ND1400777.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Therefore, the NDRB discerned no impropriety and the Applicant’s separation for Physical Standards was proper.However, per Naval Military Personnel Manual Article 1910-170, the characterization of service for separation due to Physical Standards should be Honorable unless a General is warranted. Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall but the narrative reason for separation shall remain.The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing for a period of fifteen...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200161

    Original file (ND1200161.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)20060927 - 20070514Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20070515Age at Enlistment:Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20100716Highest Rank/Rate:HNLength of Service:Year(s)Month(s) 2 Day(s)Education Level:AFQT: 43EvaluationMarks:Performance:2.0(2)Behavior:2.0(2)OTA: 2.00Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):Periods of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001862

    Original file (ND1001862.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 the administrative separation 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,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1500055

    Original file (ND1500055.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB did not have the Applicant’s record of Administrative Board; however, the result of the Board was her administrative separation from the Navy with Under Honorable Conditions (General) discharge for reason of drug abuse. 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 remain UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL) and...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000617

    Original file (ND1000617.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.Applicant seeks an upgrade to reenlist in the U.S. Navy Reserve.2. After considering the facts surrounding this case and the documentation submitted by the Applicant, the Board found this issue did not provide a basis for which relief could be granted.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, and...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800018

    Original file (ND0800018.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After assuring compliance with MILPERSMAN 1910-170 the separation authority directed the Applicant’s discharge by reason of physical standards with a service characterization of general (under honorable conditions). The Applicant’s conduct reflects his willful failure to meet the requirements of his contract with the U.S. Navy and falls far short of that required for an upgrade in his characterization of service. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101594

    Original file (ND1101594.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Representation: 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. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201117

    Original file (ND1201117.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)20020821 - 20030817Active: 20030818 -20070807 HON Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20070808Age at Enlistment:Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20100723Highest Rank/Rate:HT2Length of Service:Year(s)Month(s) 15 Day(s)Education Level:AFQT: 71EvaluationMarks:Performance:4.0(3)Behavior:1.3(3)OTA: 3.04Awards and Decorations...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700351

    Original file (ND0700351.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, reflects his willful failure to meet the requirements of his contract with the U.S. Navy and falls far short of that required for an upgrade of his characterization of service.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...