Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901058
Original file (ND0901058.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-HN, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20090318
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)        19990623 - 19990723 ELS          Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment: 19990730     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years 33 MONTHS Extension
Date of Discharge: 20030703      Highest Rank/Rate: HN
Length of Service : Y ear ( s ) M onth ( s ) 04 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: NFIR
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 2.0 ( 1 )      Behavior: 1.0 ( 1 )        OTA: 1.57

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      NDSM GCM Pistol FMFSI

Period of UA : 20030418-20030421 (3 DAYS )

NJP :
- 20030307 :       Art icle 91 ( Insubordinate conduct )
         Article 107 (False official statement)
          Awarded : Susp ended : Vacated 2003031 7

20030422:        Applicant’s request for appeal of NJP dated 20030310.

S CM :

SPCM:

C C :
- 20030108:     County Court appearance, judge noted disrespect to court and possible perjury charge (pending legal action ).

Retention Warning Counseling :
- 20030109 :       For unauthorized absence (late for work)
- 20030110 :       For unauthorized absence (late for work)
- 20030113 :       For unauthorized absence (late for work)
- 20030114 :       For unauthorized absence (late for work)
- 20030224:      For failure to follow Flight Line Ambulance SOP.


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 1910-142, 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 91 (Insubordinate conduct), and Article 107 (False official statement) .




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

Applicant’s Issues

 1. Believes that this discharge was not justified.
2. Applicant claims s everal errors were made (in his discharge) and that there is not enough evidence to support the false claims against him .
3 . Was not allowed to communicate with/ seek help from legal .

Decision

Date : 20 0 9 0917             Location: Washington D.C .        R epresentation :

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
 By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall MISCONDUCT .
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 discharg e if such change is warranted. In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of g overnment al 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) warnings, non-judicial punishment for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 91 ( Insubordinate conduct , was disrespectful to a Chief Petty Officer ), and Article 107 ( False official statement , made a false statement to his Chief Petty Officer ) . In addition to these charges, the Applicant was pending legal action by Monroe County Court (Judge noted disrespect to court and possible perjury charge s ). Based on the offense(s) committed by the Applicant, command administratively processed for separation.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his discharge “ was not justified and that un der the grounds given it was not called for . ” In the commanding officer’s letter requesting separation of the Applicant, the commander noted the justification for discharge as , “ … a result of this mast and numerous other incidents of misconduct” and “ this command has exhausted its efforts to assist the Applicant and he fai led to respond. ” For the Applicant’s edification , a service member may be separated based on commission of a serious military or civilian offense when the offense would warrant a punitive discharge. Based upon available records, nothing indicates that the Applicant’s discharge was inc onsistent with the standards of disciplin e in the United States Navy. The evidence reviewed supports the conclusion the Applica nt committed a serious offense , along with other lesser offenses, and separation from the Naval service was appropriate .
Issues 2-3 : (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends that “ several errors were made and that there was not enough true evidence to support the dales claims made against him. ” He also claims he was not allowed to communicate with legal representation nor seek help within his command for legal assistance . The government enjoys a presumption of regularity in the conduct of its affairs. The Applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support h is issue. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the Applicant produced any evidence to support the contention that there were errors made in his discharge or was denied any help thr ough his command. The Applicant’s statements alone do not overcome the government’s presumption of regularity in this case.

Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s s ummary of s ervice, r ecord e ntries, and d ischarge p rocess, 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. 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.

 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 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 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 | 2011_Navy | ND1101068

    Original file (ND1101068.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901335

    Original file (ND0901335.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1.I was told by my CO and XO that I would receive a medical discharge. The NDRB determined the awarded character of service was warranted and the narrative reason for discharge was appropriate.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, medical and service record entries, and discharge process, the Board found...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900755

    Original file (MD0900755.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The ASB recommended, by a vote of 2-1, the Applicant should receive an “Under Other Than Honorable” conditions discharge.After a thorough review, the NDRB determined the Applicant’s medical condition was an underlying cause that contributed to his misconduct. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1500551

    Original file (ND1500551.rtf) Auto-classification: 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 remain UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL) and the narrative reason for separation shall remain MISCONDUCT (SERIOUS OFFENSE). ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant Complaint Procedures : If you believe the decision in your case is unclear, not responsive to the issues you...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900355

    Original file (MD0900355.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board determined the awarded discharge characterization was appropriate and an upgrade wouldbe inappropriate.The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. 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 limited post service documentation provided an upgrade...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200138

    Original file (ND1200138.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant faults youth and immaturity for his misconduct.2. ” 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 for the sole...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600564

    Original file (ND0600564.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. No indication of appeal in the record.040727: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense with the least favorable characterization of service as general (under honorable conditions).040802: Applicant found physically qualified for separation.040803: Applicant advised of rights and having...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900067

    Original file (MD0900067.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received at the NDRB within 15 years from the date of discharge. ” 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. If a former member has been discharged for more than 15 years, has already been granted a personal appearance hearing or has...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1300352

    Original file (ND1300352.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)20090817 - 20091026Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20091027Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20110722Highest Rank/Rate: ETSNLength of Service: Year(s) Month(s) 26 Day(s)Education Level:AFQT: 84EvaluationMarks:Performance:3.0(1)Behavior:3.0(1)OTA: 3.17Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):Pistol...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1300375

    Original file (ND1300375.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)20031020 - 20040706Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20040707Age at Enlistment:Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20090922Highest Rank/Rate:HM3Length of Service:Years Months22 DaysEducation Level:AFQT: 64EvaluationMarks:Performance:3.4(5)Behavior:2.8(5)OTA: 3.33Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):JMUAPeriods of...