Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900441
Original file (ND0900441.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-SN, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20081216
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)      20011026 - 20011106     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment: 20011107     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20051103      Highest Rank/Rate: SN
Length of Service : Y ear ( s ) M onth ( s ) 27 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: NFIR
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 2.0 (2)      Behavior: 2.0 ( 2 )        OTA: 2.09

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):     

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP :

S CM :

SPCM:

C C :

Retention Warning Counseling :


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. Record of service.
2. No misconduct.
3 . False allegations.
4. No due process in discharge proceedings.
5. Discrimination against the Applicant.
6. Conspiracy against the Applicant.

Decision

Date: 20 0 9 0312             Location: Washington D.C .        R epresentation :

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
 By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall IN LIEU OF TRIAL BY COURT MARTIAL .
Discussion

 : ( ) . The Applicant contends he is entitled to a discharge upgrade due to his record of service; his lack of misconduct during his servic e; the false allegations of misconduct made against him; the denial of due process in handling his discharge; discrimination against the Applicant; and because there was a conspiracy against the Applicant. 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 available record of evidence shows the Applicant was charged with unspecified violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice which were forwarded for trial by court-martial. The Applicant should understand r elevant and material facts stated in a court-martial specification are presumed by the NDRB to be established facts. The record also shows the Applicant requested separation with an “Under Other Than Honorable Conditions” discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial. The NDRB rejects the Applicant’s contentions. If the Applicant felt he was mistakenly or wrongly charged with a crime, it was his obligation to contest those charges at the time they were made. During a trial he would have had the opportunity to mount a defense again st the charges against him. Along with the DD Form 293 and a few personal statements, the Applicant submitted copies of letters to Senators regarding his pursuit of a Master-at-Arms rating and several in - service documents , but no evidence to support his contention s. T herefore , t he NDRB must rely upon the presumption of regularity in the con duct of government affairs and 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 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 institutions; attendance or completion of higher education (official transcripts); and documentation of alcohol non-dependency and 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.

The Applicant did not provide any post-service documentation, but s hould he obt ain additional evidence or post- service documentation he may wish to apply for a personal appearance. There are veteran's organizations, such as the American Legion, willing to provide guidance to former service members in their efforts to obtain a discharge upgrade.

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 31 May 2005 and Present, Article 1910-106, SEPARATION IN LIEU OF TRIAL BY COURT-MARTIAL.

B. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part IV, Para 403m(7)(b), Presumption Concerning Court-Martial Specifications .

C . 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 .



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 | 2013_Marine | MD1300040

    Original file (MD1300040.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 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 a personal appearance hearing for a period of fifteen years from the date of discharge. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are...

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1100109

    Original file (MD1100109.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    As such, matters of propriety are not within the authority of the NDRB in relation to punishment as adjudged in a punitive trial by court-martial. 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 hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years of the Applicant’s...

  • USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201005

    Original file (MD1201005.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    As such, matters of propriety are not within the authority of the NDRB in relation to punishment as adjudged in a punitive trial by court-martial. The NDRB, however, did conduct a thorough review of the Applicant’s discharge under the pertinent standards of equity to determine if any factors in this particular case merited clemency. Clemency denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, and discharge...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900836

    Original file (ND0900836.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After receiving the court-martial charges, the Applicant submitted a request (dated March 27, 1996) for administrative discharge under general conditions in lieu of trial by court-martial and also requested a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge. The NDRB determined the awarded discharge was appropriate considering the length of service and the UCMJ violations involved, and based on the limited post-service documentation provided an upgrade would be inappropriate. ” Additional...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901087

    Original file (ND0901087.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The command granted his request and discharged him with an Under Other than Honorable characterization of service based on the offenses committed. Relief denied.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 . ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900376

    Original file (ND0900376.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years from the date of discharge. 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 -...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900827

    Original file (ND0900827.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)20030730 - 20030818Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20030819Age at Enlistment:Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20061108Highest Rank/Rate:ABH3Length of Service: Year(s)Month(s)20 Day(s)Education Level:AFQT: 61EvaluationMarks:Performance:1.3(3)Behavior:1.0(3)OTA: 1.38Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):Periods of...

  • USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1401468

    Original file (MD1401468.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. Relief denied.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 remainUNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS and the narrative reason for separation shall remainMISCONDUCTThe Applicant remains eligible for a...

  • USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1401271

    Original file (MD1401271.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Therefore no two cases, no matter how similar, are guaranteed to receive the same punishment. ” 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. 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900191

    Original file (MD0900191.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.Applicant did not know he was UA for 30 years, believed he was discharged. The NDRB determined an upgrade would be inappropriate.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant Complaint Procedures : If you...