Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801579
Original file (ND0801579.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-CSSN, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20080722
Characterization of Service Received:
Narrative Reason for Discharge: (SERIOUS OFFENSE)
Authority for Discharge: MILPERSMAN

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

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive: US N R (DEP)      NFIR - 20020822                  Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment: 20020823     Period of E nlistment : Years Extension         Date of Discharge: 20061013
Length of Service : Y ear s M onth s 16 D a ys      Education Level: NFIR     Age at Enlistment:      AFQT: NFIR
Highest Rank /Rate :       CS3       Evaluation M arks: Performance:   NFIR     Behavior: NFIR   OTA: NFIR
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): Rifle Pistol


Periods of UA /C ONF : 20060616-20060904 (80 days)

NJP :
- 20060916 : Art icle 86 ( U A) 20060616-20060904 (80 days)
Article 87 ( Missing movement), 3 s pecifications :
                  - Specification 1 : 20060617
                   - Specification 2 : 20060712
                  - Specification 3 : 20060810
 Awarded : Susp ended :

S CM : SPCM: C C : 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 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 and 87 .




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

Applicant’s Issues

 1. Mitigating circumstances.
2. Isolated period of misconduct.
3 . Punishment too severe.

Decision

Date: 20 08 1030             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

 : ( ) . The Applicant contends he is entitled to a discharge upgrade due to mitigating circumstances surrounding his case. Specifically , he contends he was denied the leave he needed to help his wife who was having a complicated pregnancy. 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 is marred by one NJP for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) : Article 86 ( UA ) and Article 87 ( M issing movement). Violation of Article 86 for more than thirty days or any violation of Article 87 is considered a serious offense, punishable by punitive discharge and confinement if adjudicated and awarded by a special or general court-martial. The command did not pursue a punitive discharge but instead opted for an administrative discharge. The Applicant claims he requested leave to care for his wife , but it was denied by his command. The record of evidence shows t he Applicant did not disclose his wife’s condition when making the leave request. The command therefore denied the request since the ship was about to get underway. The NDRB determined an upgrade would be inappropriate.

: ( ) . The Applicant contends his discharge should be upgraded based on his record of service which was good apart from a single period of misconduct. For the edification of the Applicant, d espite a Sailor’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. The Board acknowledged the violation of Article 86 and Article 87 warranted the awarded discharge and determined an upgrade would be inappropriate.

: ( ) . The Applicant contends his discharge was too harsh. A n “Under Other Than Honorable Conditions” c haracterization of service is warranted when the basis for separation is commission or omission of an act that constitutes a significant departure from the conduct expected from a service member. The Applicant’s command determined this was the appropriate characterization of service based on his service record. T he record of evidence shows t he Applicant’s command made repeated attempts to convince the Applicant to return from unauthorized absence before he was declared a deserter (after 30 days). However, the Applicant refused to return until he was ready. Additionally, it was noted the Applicant failed to disclose to his command during any communication his wife had a complicated pregnancy . Due to the serious nature of the Applicant’s misconduct and poor judgment in communicating the true state of the situation , t he NDRB 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 or for any basis wherein an Other Than Honorable Discharge is authorized, 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 | 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 | ND0900766

    Original file (ND0900766.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board determined the characterization of service received, “Under Other Than Honorable Conditions”, was an appropriate characterization considering the length of service and the UCMJ violations involved, and based on the lack of post service documentation provided an upgrade would be inappropriate.Should the Applicant feel their post service conduct becomes substantial enough to warrant a personal appearance, there are veteran’s organizations, such as the American Legion, willing to...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101857

    Original file (ND1101857.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. ” Additional Reviews : After...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901161

    Original file (ND0901161.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The command referred the Applicant for a SCMand then opted to administratively discharge him by reason of misconduct, commission of a serious offense.he Applicant states there were no documented efforts his command tried to rehabilitate his behavior, which he claims was correctable. The Board determined the characterization of service received, “Under Other Than Honorable Conditions”, was an appropriate characterization considering the length of service and the UCMJ violations involved, and...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801229

    Original file (ND0801229.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Due to the seriousness of the multiple violations and his length of service and amount of experience in the Navy, the Board determined the award of an “Under Other Than Honorable Condition” discharge was appropriate and an upgrade or change would be inappropriateAfter 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800653

    Original file (ND0800653.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801172

    Original file (ND0801172.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 | 2008_Navy | ND0800996

    Original file (ND0800996.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): Pertinent Regulation/Law A. After a thorough review of the available...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801261

    Original file (ND0801261.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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; documentation of educational pursuits; certification of non-involvement with civil authorities; evidence of continuing volunteer or church service, and documentation of financial stability or evidence of good standing with financial institutions or credit card companies.The Applicant...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801863

    Original file (ND0801863.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    While the Applicant may feel his family circumstances contributed to his misconduct, the record of evidencedoes not demonstrate the Applicant was not responsible for his misconduct or should not be held accountable for his actions due to his wife’s pregnancy or his youth and immaturity.The NDRB determined the awarded discharge characterization was appropriate and an upgrade based on the Applicant’s claim of mitigating circumstances would be inappropriate.After a thorough review of the...