Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900319
Original file (ND0900319.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-FN, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20081125
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)        19990723 - 19990927     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 19990928     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20010406      Highest Rank/Rate: FN
Length of Service : Y ear ( s ) M onth ( s ) 29 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 56
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 1.0 ( 1 )      Behavior: 1.0 ( 1 )        OTA: 1.67

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):     

Periods of UA /C ONF : UA: 0600, 20000703 - 0900, 20000718 ( 15 days); 0600, 20010220 - 0610, 20010223 ( 3 days) / CONF:

NJP :
- 20000511 :       Art icle 134 ( Drunk and disorderly)
         Awarded : Susp ended :

S CM :    SPCM:    C C :

Retention Warning Counseling :

- 20000512 :       NJP f or drunk and disorderly conduct .

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

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

         “ GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS ”
         “ MILPERSMAN 1910-140 ”
         “ PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT ”

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 /To Representat ion :            From /To Congress m ember :         

Oth er Documentation :   

Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 18, effective 12 December 1997 until 21 August 2002,
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 .


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

Applicant’s Issues

 1.       Wants his reenlistment (RE) code for reenlistment purposes .
2.       Wrongfully discharged while trying to decide on a career.
Decision

Date: 2009 1022             Location: Washington D.C.        R epresentation :

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall SECRETARIAL AUTHORITY.

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 reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant. The Applicant’s record of service included NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13) warning and nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 134 (Drunk and disorderly conduct). The record also reflects the Applicant had two unauthorized absences (UAs) totaling 1 8 days subsequent to be awarded the NJP. Based on the offense committed by the Applicant, command administratively processed for separation . When notified for Administrative Separation Processing, the Applicant waived rights to consult with qualified counsel and to request a General Court-Martial Convening Authority review.

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant is requesting a change in his RE Code for reenlistment purposes. 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 BCNR can make changes to reenlistment codes. Additionally, the NDRB 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.
: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his discharge was improper because he was not given adequate time to select a career. The evidence of record does reflect that the Applicant was disenrolled from the Engineering Mechanical Core program due to a lack of comprehension and retention. Additionally, the Commanding Officer’s (USS BATAAN (LDH 5)) letter of 06 April 2001, contained the following comments: 1) all reasonable attempts to rehabilitate the Applicant have been unsuccessful, 2) despite being awarded NJP for drunk and disorderly conduct and being issued a page 13 counseling warning he commenced two unauthorized absence periods, 3) his performance continues to be below average and he lacks the motivation or initiative to increase his knowledge or enhance his self worth, 4) his substandard behavior is detrimental to good order and discipline, and 5) he was separated on the basis of misconduct du e to a pattern of misconduct. Based on a review of the available records the Board disagrees with the Applicant’s contention regarding the command’s failure to give him adequate time to select a career. However, the NDRB has determined that his discharge was improper since there is no evidence in the record to support a basis for discharge due to a pattern of misconduct . The record of evidence as previously discussed indicates the Applicant had only one NJP and two uncharged UA’s. Additionally, t he Commanding officer’s letter of 06 April 2001 discussed supra, indicates the Applicant had one NJP and two UA periods. T he Applicant did not meet the requirements of the Military Personnel Manual for administrative processing based on a pattern of misconduct. T herefore, the discharge was improper.

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 that the discharge was improper. Therefore, the narrative reason for separation shall change to . However, based on offenses committed by the Applicant and his failure to respond to counseling, the awarded characterization of service shall GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS). The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing for a period of fifteen years from the date of discharge. The Applicant is directed to the Addendum, specifically the paragraphs titled Additional Reviews, Automatic Upgrades, and Post-Service Conduct .


ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant

 Complaint Procedures : If you believe 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 : 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. 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. There are veterans organizations such as the American Legion and the Association of Service Disable Veterans that are willing to provide guidance to former service members in their efforts to obtain a discharge upgrade. If a former member has been discharged for more than 15 years, has already been granted 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 U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) determines eligibility for post-service benefits, not the NDRB. 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.
Employment/Educational Opportunities : The NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational opportunities. Regulations limit the NDRB’s review to a determination of the propriety and equity of the discharge.

 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 is processed subsequently for an administrative involuntary separation or is referred to a court martial for misconduct, the disability evaluation is suspended 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 BCNR can grant this type of narrative reason change.

 Automatic Upgrades - There is no law or regulation that provides for an unfavorable discharge to be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct subsequent to leaving naval service.

Post-Service Conduct : The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. 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 support a post-service conduct upgrade includes, but is not limited to: a verifiable continuous employment record; marriage and children’s birth certificates (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; attendance at 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 in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member’s overall character.

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 NDRB 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 | ND1001299

    Original file (ND1001299.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 | 2009_Navy | ND0900112

    Original file (ND0900112.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. The Board determined the characterization of service received, “Under Other Than Honorable Conditions”, was an appropriate characterization considering the length of service, the UCMJ violations involved, and lack of post service documentation.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record Entries, Discharge Process...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901429

    Original file (MD0901429.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. ” 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. If a former member has been discharged for more than 15 years, has already been granted a personal appearance hearing or has otherwise exhausted...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100766

    Original file (ND1100766.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Summary of ServicePrior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)20021115 - 20030407Active: 20030408 - 20081106 HON Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20081107Age at Enlistment:Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20091130Highest Rank/Rate:FC1Length of Service:YearMonths24 DaysEducation Level:AFQT: 80EvaluationMarks:Performance:3.0(1)Behavior:1.0(1)OTA: 2.86Awards and Decorations (per DD...

  • USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1500352

    Original file (MD1500352.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s record of service included 6105 counseling warnings, for of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article (Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer), Article (Failure to obey an order or regulation, 2 specifications), and Article (General article, Drunk and disorderly in his conduct towards a SSgt (SDO) and Sgt (DNCO); and for of the UCMJ: Article 86 (Absence without leave), Article 92 (Failure to obey order or...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700496

    Original file (ND0700496.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant contends that his discharge was inequitable due to inconsistencies in documentation of his alcohol dependency.The service records that the Board reviewed indicate the following: 1) The Applicant went to NJP 20041014 for drunk and disorderly conduct in Guam and damage to government property, 2) completed Alcohol Impact 20041104, 3) was diagnosed as alcohol dependent by a psychologist 20050222, 4) went to NJP on 20050224 for drunk and disorderlyconduct and assault on a commissioned...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900843

    Original file (ND0900843.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 | 2014_Navy | ND1400928

    Original file (ND1400928.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s record of misconduct and counselling warnings clearly meets the Navy’s standard for administrative separation for reason of a pattern of misconduct in accordance with regulations. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the Applicant produced any evidence, to support the contention that PTSD was the cause of his pattern of misconduct.Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801467

    Original file (ND0801467.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Feels the military should train service members about the dangers of alcohol abuse. The Board determined his request for an upgrade was without merit.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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301200

    Original file (ND1301200.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After meeting the requirements for administrative separation for a Pattern of Misconduct, his commanding officer determined he was no longer fit to serve and processed the Applicant for discharge. ” 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 upgrade a discharge...