Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900254
Original file (ND0900254.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-AZAA, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20081114
Characterization of Service Received:
Narrative Reason for Discharge:
Authority for Discharge: MILPERSMAN 3630600

 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: 19951109     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 19970501      Highest Rank/Rate: AZAA
Length of Service : Y ear ( s ) M onth ( s ) 01 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 42
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 1.0 ( 1 )      Behavior: 1.0 ( 1 )        OTA: 1.50

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):     

Period of UA : 0700-1245, 19961121 (Less than 24 hours)

NJP :
- 19970314 :       Art icle 92 ( Failure to obey order or regulation )
         Article 134 (Failed to pay debt), 2 specifications
         Article 86 (Absent without leave)
          Awarded : Susp ended :

S CM : SPCM: C C :

Retention Warning Counseling :

- 19960910 : For violation of the UCMJ, Article 134 (Failure to pay just debts)
- 19951110: For fraudulent induction as evidenced by failure to disclose required basic enlistment information.

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

The NDRB did note administrative error(s) on the original DD Form 214:

         Block 5, Date of Birth, should read “ 69JUL10 ”

         Decorations, Medals, Badges…Awarded or Authorized, delete “ RECEIVED FIRST GOOD CONDUCT AWARD 97MAR14 ” . Member does not meet the criteria for this award; date indicates the start of a new period based on member’s NJP.
        
The NDRB will recommend to the C ommander, Navy Personnel Command , that the DD 214 be corrected as appropriate.



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 :

Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 14, effective 3 October 1996 until 12 December 1997, Article 3630605, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL 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 92 ( Failure to obey order or regulation ) .



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

Applicant’s Issues

 1. Alleges wife ended his career by making accusations and harassing his chain of command.

Decision

Date: 20 0 9 0226             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 his discharge characterization should be upgraded because his wife made certain accusations and harassed his officers and petty officers causing them to bring false allegations and discharge him. 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 two retention warnings and one NJP for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice : Article 86 (UA), Article 92 ( Failure to obey a lawful order or regulation ) and Article 134 ( Failure to pay debt ) . There is no evidence in the record or produced by the Applicant to demonstrate w rongdoing by the Applicant ’s wife or the chain of command. The misconduct which resulted in his administrative separation is clearly documented.

The Applicant has requested an upgrade in his discharge characterization to “Honorable”. An “H onorable ” characterization of service is warranted when the quality of a member’s service generally meets the standard of acceptable conduct and performance for naval personnel, or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization of service would be clearly inappropriate. A “General (U nder H onorable C onditions) ” discharge is warranted when the quality of the member’s service has been honest and faithful but significant negative aspects of the member’s conduct or performance of duty outweighed the positive aspects of the member’s service record. Based on the Applicant’s performance and seriousness of the offenses committed the Board determined an upgrade would be inappropriate.

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. Docum entation 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 institutio ns; 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 cas e- 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.

The Applicant provided no documentation of post - service conduct for the Board’s consideration. 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 , the UCMJ violations involved, and t he lack of p ost- service documentation .

After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record Entries, and Discharge Process , 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 | ND0900835

    Original file (ND0900835.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    While the Applicant may believe his wife was a factor in his misconduct, the record does not reflect he was not responsible for his actions or not accountable for his misconduct due to his wife.The NDRB determined the Applicant’s discharge was warranted based on his misconduct and the command administratively separated the Applicant properly from the naval service.Relief denied. The Board determined the characterization of service received, Under Other Than Honorable Conditions, was an...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901357

    Original file (MD0901357.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. After careful consideration, the NDRB found the Applicant’s contention to be without merit.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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00108

    Original file (ND00-00108.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00108 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 991028, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION 931101: Vacate suspended reduction to AZAN awarded at CO's NJP dated 8Sep93 due to continued misconduct.931102: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 134: Disorderly conduct, drunkenness.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501299

    Original file (ND0501299.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Issues, as stated Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application: “I would like to upgrade my discharge and re-enter naval service. Charge: violation of the UCMJ, Article 132: Specification: Did, on or about 6 October 1989, presenting a DD Form 1351-2, Travel Voucher, and a DD Form 1351-4. 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

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101368

    Original file (ND1101368.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant was not entitled to an administrative separation board.The Applicant was separated from the Navy on 2 December 2009 with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge due to Pattern of Misconduct. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years of the Applicant’s date of discharge. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to...

  • 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 | 2013_Navy | ND1300280

    Original file (ND1300280.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    However, the NDRB did a thorough review of the circumstances that led to his discharge and the discharge process to ensure his discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, recordentries, 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200624

    Original file (ND1200624.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant seeks to have his re-entry code changed.2. 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.In...

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1002356

    Original file (MD1002356.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Between November 1998 and June 2000, the Applicant received three NJPs, one civil arrest, and one 6105 retention warning, which included underage drinking, drunk on duty, driving while intoxicated, failure to obey orders and regulations, wrongful cohabitation with a female not his wife, and failure to pay debts and child support payments on time.Per the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, an Honorable characterization of service is warranted when the quality of a member’s service...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501545

    Original file (ND0501545.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Character Reference ltr from T_ T. C_ (Applicant), undated, not signedNational Personnel Records Check for Applicant, dtd November 4, 2005 Ltr form National Personnel Records Center, dtd February 13, 2006 Applicant’s DD Form 214 (Service 2) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: None Active:...