Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900753
Original file (ND0900753.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-AOAA, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20090217
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)        NFIR      Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment: 20021028     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20061005      Highest Rank/Rate: AOAN
Length of Service : Y ear ( s ) M onth ( s ) 8 D a y ( s )
Education Level: NFIR    AFQT: 34
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 3.0 ( 1 )      Behavior: 2.0 ( 2 )        OTA: 2.67

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      (2)

Periods of UA /C ONF :

SCM: SPCM: CC: Retention Warning Counseling :

NJP :
- 20060609 : Art icle 92 (Failure to obey lawful order, consuming alcohol while on Class “B” liberty status)
Article 134 (Drunk and disorderly conduct)
 Awarded : Susp ended :

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. Discharge is a barrier to employment opportunities.
2. Discharge was inequitable because he was singled out amongst several individuals.
3 . Discharge was inequitable because of discrimination and vindictive treatment by members of the chain of command.

Decision

Date: 20 0 9 0507             Location: Washington D.C .        R epresentation :

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
 By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall 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 , regarding .

: ( ) . The Applicant contends he is entitled to a discharge upgrade due to the fact he was singled out amongst several individuals who committed the same offense. 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 1 NJP for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 92 (Failure to obey lawful order, consuming alcohol while on Class “B” liberty status) and Article 134 (Drunk and disorderly conduct). These 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. The command did not refer the Applicant for a court-martial but opted instead for an administrative discharge based on misconduct, commission of a serious offense. The Applicant admits he did drink during a reception while in Class “B” liberty status and was drunk and disorderly. Furthermore, the NDRB reviews each case independently and on its own merit. The fact the Applicant seems to allege others in the command were guilty of t he same misconduct but only he was singled out has no direct bearing on his case; nor can those allegations be proved by the documented evidence either in the service record or provided. The NDRB determined the awarded discharge was appropriate and an up grade would inappropriate based on this issue.

: ( ) . The Applicant contends he is entitled to a discharge upgrade due to the fact he was discriminated against and received vindictive treatment from members of his chain of command. The Applicant provided a letter from his father stating this, but did not provide any tangible evidence to confirm his allegations. The NDRB determined this issue was without merit and determined the awarded discharge characterization was appropriate and an upgrade would be in appropriate.

For the Applicant’s edification, 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; 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, “Under Other Than 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 their post service conduct becomes substantial enough to warrant a personal appearance, there are veteran’s organizations, such as the American Legion, willing to provide guidance to assist 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 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 (Failure to obey lawful order, consuming alcohol while on Class “B” liberty status) and Article 134 (Drunk and disorderly conduct).

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 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.
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 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.
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 NDRB 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 NDRB B oard 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 | 2012_Navy | ND1200103

    Original file (ND1200103.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant was notified of administrative separation processing for Misconduct (Commission of a Serious Offense), Misconduct (Pattern of Misconduct), and Alcohol Rehabilitation Failure. 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201843

    Original file (MD1201843.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: Rehabilitation/Treatment: Criminal Records: Personal Documentation: Community Service: References: Department of VA letter: Other Documentation: Additional Statements:From Applicant: From/To Representation:From/ToCongress member: Pertinent Regulation/Law A. Paragraph 6419, SEPARATION IN...

  • USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1200753

    Original file (MD1200753.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In addition, the Applicant submitted a request for a conditional waiver of his administrative separation board if his discharge would be suspended for twelve months where the Applicant stated his understanding and acknowledged that any further misconduct during the suspension period on his part would cause the vacation of the suspension and execution of the discharge with a characterization Under Other Than Honorable Conditions.The NDRB determined there was no impropriety or inequity with...

  • USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1300550

    Original file (MD1300550.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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.During the Applicant’s three years and eight months of service, he received one retention warning and was found guilty at two NJPs and one Summary Court-Martial of violating several UCMJ articles. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are...

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1101867

    Original file (MD1101867.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Based on the Article 112a violation, processing for administrative separation is mandatory.The Applicant’s service record documents a punitive conviction and punishment, as adjudged by a Special Court-Martial, on 29 December 2005. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101440

    Original file (ND1101440.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant contends his undiagnosed medical conditions were contributing factors in his misconduct.After a complete review of the Applicant’s service and medical records and medical documentation provided by the Applicant, the NDRB could not determine if disorders diagnosed 8 years after his discharge had any bearing on his in-service misconduct that included three specifications of larceny. Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0902621

    Original file (ND0902621.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include...

  • USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1500241

    Original file (MD1500241.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s record of service included 6105 counseling warnings, and for of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation; 4 specifications), Article 111 (Drunken or reckless operation of a vehicle), Article 108 (Military property of United States; loss, damage, destruction, or wrongful disposition), Article 86 (Absence without leave; failure to be at appointed place of duty), and Article 134 (General article, drunk and disorderly; 2...

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1100283

    Original file (MD1100283.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 5 Dec 1996, the Separation Authority directed that the Applicant be separated from the Marine Corps with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge due to Pattern of Misconduct. The discharge was effected on 10 Dec 1996.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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001889

    Original file (ND1001889.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of governmentalaffairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include...