Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900585
Original file (ND0900585.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-YN3, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20090113
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) 20011011 - 20011029        Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment: 20011030     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years 28 M onths Extension
Date of Discharge: 20070921      Highest Rank/Rate: YN3
Length of Service : Y ear ( s ) M onth ( s ) 22 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 36
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 3.0 ( 1 )      Behavior: 3.0 ( 1 )        OTA: 3.67

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle Pistol

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP :
- 20070802 :       Art icle 92 ( Failure to obey a lawful general regulation by wrongfully engaging in an unduly familiar relationship with an officer)
         Article 134 (Indecent acts by wrongfully having sexual intercourse)
         Awarded : Susp ended :

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. Isolated incident of misconduct.
2. Record of service.

Decision

Date: 20 0 9 0402             Location: Washington D.C .        R epresentation :

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
 By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE .
Discussion

 : ( ) . The Applicant contends his discharge should be upgraded based on his record of service which was good apart from a single isolated period of misconduct. 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 one NJP for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 92 (Disobeying a lawful order) and Article 134 (Indecent acts). Violation of Article 92 is considered a serious offense 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. The command did not refer the Applicant for a court-martial but opted instead for an administrative discharge. Despite a Sailor’s prior record of service, certain serious offenses, even though isolated, warrant separation from the naval service in order to maintain proper order and discipline. The violation of Article 92 and the nature of the Article 134 violation are both acts which undermine the authority, good order and discipline within any command when committed. The Applicant failed to provide any documentation or evidence on his behalf in his request for an upgrade. Additionally, these violations are not the expected conduct from military service members who traditionally earn an under “Honorable” conditions discharge characterization. The NDRB determined the awarded discharge characterization was appropriate and an upgrade founded upon the Applicant’s record of service 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

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 92 and Article 134.



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 | 2006_Navy | ND0601037

    Original file (ND0601037.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    There is credible evidence in the record that the Applicant committed Robbery and used a firearm during the robbery in question. The NDRB found that the Applicant's service was equitably characterized. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Service Record Entries, Medical Record Entries, Elements of Discharge and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found the Applicant’s discharge proper and equitable.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900322

    Original file (ND0900322.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board determined the awarded discharge characterization of“General (Under Honorable Conditions) ” was appropriate and an upgrade would be inappropriate.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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0902500

    Original file (ND0902500.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Based on the offenses committed by the Applicant, command administratively processed for separation. 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 foundTherefore, 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1500564

    Original file (ND1500564.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. 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 GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS) and the narrative reason for separation shall remain MISCONDUCT (SERIOUS OFFENSE). ” Additional Reviews : After a...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100345

    Original file (ND1100345.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Based on the offenses committed by the Applicant, his command administratively processed him for separation. The decision to administratively separate a servicemember is made independently of the imposition of NJP per regulation and is a separate and distinct process from NJP. ” 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 | 2008_Marine | MD0801554

    Original file (MD0801554.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 orders or regulations), and Article 134 (Adultery). With a vote of 5-0,the Board found the discharge was proper but not equitable in that the violations were limited enough to rate a “General (Under Honorable Conditions)” rather than the awarded “Under Other Than Honorable...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801268

    Original file (ND0801268.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 (Describe): After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800472

    Original file (ND0800472.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In the Applicant’s case the DD-214 indicates that she was processed for administrative separation based on MILPERSMAN 1910-142 (commission of a serious offense). The summary of service clearly documents the Applicant’s violations of UCMJ Articles 91 and 92 which created the basis for her administrative separation by reason of misconduct do to the commission of a serious offense. The Board determined that the documentation provided by the Applicant did not mitigate the misconduct which...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800413

    Original file (ND0800413.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 | 2009_Navy | ND0900626

    Original file (ND0900626.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB determined the awarded discharge characterization was appropriate and an upgrade founded upon the Applicant’s admission to consensual homosexual act 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...