Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900950
Original file (ND0900950.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-OSSR, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20090313
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)        20000705 - 20010523     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment: 20010524     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20030620      Highest Rank/Rate: OSS N
Length of Service : Y ear ( s ) M onth ( s ) 27 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 56
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: NFIR         Behavior: NFIR   OTA: NFIR

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):     

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP :
- 20030204 :       Art icle 86 ( Failing to go or leaving place of duty )
         Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation)
         Article 117 (Provoking speeches or gestures)
         Article 134 (Sentinel or lookout, offense against or by)
         Article 134 (Threatening of harm or death to another)
                  Awarded : Susp ended :

- 20030204 :       Article 89 ( Disrespectful towards superior commissioned officer )
                  Awarded : CONF 3 DAYS Susp ended:

- 20030317 :       Article 9 1 ( Insubordinate conduct )
          Article 134 (Indecent language)
                  Awarded : Susp ended:

- 20030607 :       Article 8 9 ( Disrespect toward a commissioned officer ) , 3 specifications
         Article 90 (Disobeying superior commissioned officer)
         Article 91 (Insubordinate conduct)
         Article 92 (Dereliction of duty)
         Article 134 (Indecent language)
                  Awarded : Susp ended:

S CM : SPCM: C C :

Retention Warning Counseling :
- 20030204 :       For personal behavior, professionalism, military bearing, and reporting to appointed place of duty.


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), re-issued October 2002, effective 22 August 2002 until 25 January 2004, 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 .

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 89 (Disrespectful towards superior commissioned officer) , Article 90 (Disobeying superior commissioned officer), Article 91 (Insubordinate conduct), Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation), Article 92 (Dereliction of duty), Article 117 (Provoking speeches or gestures), Article 134 (Sentinel or lookout, offense against or by), Article 134 (Indecent language) and Article 134 (Communicating a Threat).


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

Applicant’s Issues

 1. Characterization of discharge is affecting my e mployment opportunities .
2. Although Applicant was immature in the manner he dealt with change, his record of service was good the first two years.

Decision

Date : 20 0 9 0820    Location: Washington D.C .      R epresentation :

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
 By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall MISCONDUCT .
Discussion
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 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 discharg e if such change is warranted. The Applicant’s record of service was marred by a retention warning and four NJP’s for violations of the Uniformed Code of Military Justice: Article 86 ( Unauthorized absence: f ailing to go or leaving place of duty) , Article 89 (Disrespectful towards superior commissioned officer – 4 specifications ) , Article 90 (Disobeying superior commissioned officer), Article 91 (Insubordinate conduct), Article 92 (Failure to obey an order or regulation), Article 92 (Dereliction of duty), Article 117 (Provoking speeches or gestures), Article 134 (Sentinel or lookout, offense against or by), Article 134 (Indecent language – 2 specifications) and Article 134 (Communi cating a Threat). The NDRB advises the Applicant certain serious offenses —that include those committed— warrant separation from the service in order to maintain proper order and discipline. The Applicant waived all rights regarding his administrative separation process , he acknowledged that the least favorable characterization of his service would be Other Than Honorable, and showed no desire to be retained in the Naval Service. Based on the offense s commi tted by the Applicant, his command chose to administratively discharge him .

: The NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational opportunities. The Department of Veterans A ffairs 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. Regulations limit the NDRB’s review to a determination of the propriety and equity of the discharge.

Issue 2: ( ) . The Applicant contends that although he was immature in the manner he dealt with change of command, his record of service was good the first two years, thus he would like his discharge to reflect those accomplishments. The Applicant has requested an upgrade in his characterization to “General (Under Honorable Conditions)”. For the edification of the Applicant, a “General (Under Honorable Conditions)” 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. A discharge “Under Other Than Honorable Conditions” is warranted when a member engages in conduct involving one or more acts or omissions that constitute a significant departure from the conduct expected of member s of the Naval S ervice. The Board determined the Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, reflected a significant departure from the conduct expected of a service member and the awarded characterizat ion was appropriate. Relief denied.

The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. However , 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 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; attending or completing 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 previous in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member’s overall character.

The Applicant failed to provide any documentary evidence on his behalf for post-service consideration. The Applicant could have produced evidence as stated in the above paragraph with the full understanding completion of these items alone does not guarantee an upgrade. By a unanimous vote of 5-0, t he Board determined the characterization of service received, “Under Other Than Honorable Conditions , ” and the narrative reason for the discharge; “Misconduct , ” shall remain as issued considering the length of service and the UCMJ violations in volved.

 After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s s ummary of s ervice, r ecord e ntries, d ischarge p rocess 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 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 | 2010_Navy | ND1001018

    Original file (ND1001018.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, the verbatim transcript record of trial by Special Court-Martial, and the discharge process, the NDRB determined that 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900370

    Original file (ND0900370.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.Discharged while mentally ill and never received treatment or screening for bipolar disorder with psychotic features. ” 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 does...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100880

    Original file (ND1100880.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ” 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 upon which the Board can grant relief. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a...

  • USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1500230

    Original file (MD1500230.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s record of service included 6105 counseling warnings, for of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 86 (Absence without leave, 1 specification), Article 89 (Disrespect toward a superior commissioned officer, 1 specification), Article 91 (Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer, 1 specification), Article 92 (Failure to obey an order or regulation, 1 specification), Article 113 (Misbehavior of sentinel or lookout, 2...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801287

    Original file (ND0801287.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant contends his characterization of service should be upgraded because his discharge was unjust and lacking evidence. However, there is no evidence in the records available for review, nor has the Applicant produced any evidence or medical documentation to support the contention he was misdiagnosed by military medical personnel. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is...

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1101733

    Original file (MD1101733.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 | 2012_Marine | MD1201769

    Original file (MD1201769.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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801180

    Original file (ND0801180.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Based on the severity and frequency of offenses committed by the Applicant and the lack of mitigating factors, the Board determined the “Under Other Than Honorable” discharge was the most appropriate characterization of service and upgrade 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200681

    Original file (ND1200681.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Considering the surrounding circumstances and the likelihood of reoccurrence if retained, I have determined that (the Applicant) has no potential for further Naval Service and recommend that he be discharged with a characterization of Other Than Honorable.” On 29 Nov 2010, the Applicant was separated from the Navy with an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge due to Misconduct (Serious Offense) as directed by the Separation Authority.Issues 1-2: (Nondecisional) The Applicant seeks...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801749

    Original file (ND0801749.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board determined the characterization of service received, “Under Other Than Honorable Conditions”, was an appropriate characterization considering the time served and the UCMJ violations involved, and based on the lack of post service documentation provided an upgrade 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:...