Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801923
Original file (ND0801923.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-PRAN, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20080918
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) 20040713 - 20041027        Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment: 20041028     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20070413      Highest Rank/Rate: PR3
Length of Service : Y ear s M onth s 16 D a ys
Education Level:        AFQT: 49
Evaluation M arks: Performance: NFIR Behavior: NFIR OTA: NFIR

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      NDSM SSDR GWOTSM GWOTEM

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP :
- 200 6 022 7 : Art icle 86 (U A )
Article 113 (Misbehavior of a sentinel or lookout)
 Awarded : Susp ended :

- 20070225 : Article 86 ( UA, a bsence without leave )
Awarded : Susp ended :

S CM : SPCM: C C :

Retention Warning Counseling :
- 20060227 :       For violation of UCMJ, Article 86-Unauthorized absence; violation of UCMJ, Article 113-Misbehavior of a sentinel or lookout
- 20070320 :       For article 92, failure to obey a lawful general order (wrongfully not carrying your military identification card)

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 :
Oth er Documentation :


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

Applicant’s Issues
1. Educational o pportunities .
2. Discharge due to mitigating circumstances .

Decision

Date : 20 0 9 0122                  Location: Washington D.C .        R epresentation :

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
 By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall PATTERN OF 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 , regard ing .

: ( ) . The Applicant contends his discharge , based on a pattern of misconduct, was caused by his inability to arrive at work in a timely manner due to a lack of proper t ransportation for a period of time. 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 was marred by 2 retention warnings and 2 N JP’s for violations of the Uniformed Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 86 (U A) and Article 113 (Misbehavior of a sentinel or lookout). These violations are considered serious offenses which could have resulted in a punitive discharge and confinement if adjudicated and awarded as part of a sentence by a special or general court martial. Besides the Applicants statement on the DD Form 293, he failed to provide any additional documents or evidence on his behalf. The Applicant’s only comment concerning his misconduct indicates he was living off base without proper transportation and upon receiving proper transportation and base quarters he was then able to make it to work on time. The Applicant does not explain or define what proper transportation is nor does he provide documentation indicating where he resided off base was out of reach for public transportation , taxis, or even friends willing to help him out and give him a ride to work. The Applicant should be aware, regardless if one is employed by the military or a civilian company, the responsibility to ensure transportation to and from work rests with the individual , not the employer. T he command did not refer the Applicant for a court martial but opted instead for an administrative discharge. The Board determined the Applicant’s claim of “lack of proper transportation” was without merit.

The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. However, there is no law or regulation, which provides an unfavorable 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. Documentation to help support a post service conduct upgrade includes, but is not limited to: a verifiable continuous employment record; marriage and children’s birth certificate (if applicable); character witness statements; documentation of community or church service; certification of non-involvement with civil authorities; evidence of financial stability or letters of good standing from banks, credit card companies, or other financial institutions; attending or completion of higher education (official transcripts) and documentation of a drug free lifestyle. 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 accomplishments help demonstrate previous in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member’s overall character.

To warrant an upgrade 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 the characterization of service received, “General (Under 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 at some later time his post service conduct is worthy of personally presenting to the NDRB there are organizations, such as the American Legion, willing to provide guidance and assistance in preparing such a presentation.

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

Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 11, effective 26 April 2005 until Present, Article 1910-140, SEPARATION BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT - PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT

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 (UA) and Article 113 (Misbehavior of a sentinel or lookout) .


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

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900727

    Original file (MD0900727.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 limited post service documentation provided an upgrade would be inappropriate. that are willing to provide guidance and assistance in preparing such a presentationAfter a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801749

    Original file (ND0801749.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board determined the characterization of service received, “Under Other Than Honorable Conditions”, was an appropriate characterization considering the time served and the UCMJ violations involved, and based on the lack of post service documentation provided 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:...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700855

    Original file (MD0700855.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Immature in Service DecisionBy a vote of the Characterization shall .By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall MISCONDUCT DUE TO A PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT Date:20071220Location:Washington D.C.Representation: Discussion Issue 1: 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. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service,...

  • USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1401776

    Original file (MD1401776.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    There is no indication in the evidence of record or in the documentation submitted by the Applicant that the Applicant was recommended for or processed for a medical board by proper authority. 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 OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS and the narrative reason for...

  • USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1401776 (1)

    Original file (MD1401776 (1).rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    There is no indication in the evidence of record or in the documentation submitted by the Applicant that the Applicant was recommended for or processed for a medical board by proper authority. 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 OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS and the narrative reason for...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600826

    Original file (ND0600826.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). Documentation In addition to the service and medical records, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant’s DD Form 214 (Service 2)Applicant’s statement undated PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 19890608 -...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901842

    Original file (ND0901842.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB considers post-service conduct to determine if the misconduct committed during active duty was indicative of the Applicant's character or an aberration.For post-service conduct, the Applicant provided proof of employment, a training certificate from his county police department, and a criminal background check from his local police department.While the Board applauds the Applicant’s efforts to date, the Board determined theevidence of post-service conduct was not sufficient enough...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801476

    Original file (ND0801476.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The events that transpired during the Applicant’s career in the Navy were a direct result of the Applicant’s self-denial he had an alcohol problem and the Navy only diagnosing him as an alcohol abuser and not as being alcohol dependent. The characterization of service received, “General (Under Honorable Conditions)”, was determined to be an appropriate characterization considering the length of service and the UCMJ violations involved, and based on the limited post service documentation...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700524

    Original file (ND0700524.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USNR (DEP) 20011219 - 20020606 Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20020607 Years Contracted:; Extension: Date of Discharge: 20050708 Length of Service: 3 Yrs 1Mths 2 Dys Lost Time: Days UA: Days Confined:...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001018

    Original file (ND1001018.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, the verbatim transcript record of trial by Special Court-Martial, and the discharge process, the NDRB determined that Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall BAD CONDUCT DISCHARGE and the narrative reason for separation shall remain . ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance...