Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901059
Original file (ND0901059.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-YNSA, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20090317
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)        20031023 - 20040126     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20040127     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20060620      Highest Rank/Rate: YNSN
Length of Service : Y ear ( s ) M onth ( s ) 24 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 51
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 4.0 ( 1 )      Behavior: 1.0 ( 1 )        OTA: 2.00

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):     

Period of UA : 20060430-20060512 (12 DAYS )

NJP :
- 20060517 :       Art icle 86 ( Unauthorized absence with intent to avoid specific duty )
         Article 87 (Missing movement)
         Article 90 (
W il lful disobeying a superior commissioned officer)
        
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 /To Representat ion :            From /To Congress m ember :         

Oth er Documentation :   

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 87 (Missing movement) , And Article 90 (Willful disobeying a superior commissiond officer) .



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

Applicant’s Issues

1.        Want to use the GI Bill benefits . If not , would like to get his money back.
2.      
I was kicked out for my homosexuality.
3.       S ome dudes started to harass me. I told a Petty Officer and nothing happed so I went UA and came out.

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 for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 86 ( UA , with intent to avoid specific duty, 12 days), Article 87 ( Missing movement ), and Article 90 ( Willful disobeying a superior commissioned officer) . Based on the offense(s) committed by the Applicant, command administratively processed for separation ( mandatory for the offenses) . When processed for a dministrative s eparation, the Applicant waived rights to consult with qualified counsel, and request an a dministrative b oard.

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant wants to use the GI Bill benefits , and if unable to do so, would like to get the money that he paid into the program refunded . 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. The Applicant should contact the Department of Veterans Affairs for issues involving GI Bill benefits and refunds.

Issue 2 : (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends he was kicked out for his homosexuality. Although his command initially advised his that he would be separated for ho mosexual conduct and m isconduct due to the c ommission of a s erious Offense, he was actually separated from the Navy for c ommission of a s erious o ffense (offenses previously noted, not h omosexual conduct. For the Applicant ’s edification , a service member may be separated based on commission of a serious military or civilian offense when the offense warrants separation and c ould warrant a punitive discharge under the UCMJ—his offenses met this standard . Based upon available records, nothing indicates that the Applicant’s discharge was in any way inconsistent with the standards of disciplin e in the United States Navy. The evidence reviewed supports the conclusion the Applica nt committed a serious offense and separation from the Naval service was appropriate .

Issue 3 : (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant claims that once he reported to his new command , some dudes started to harass him. The Applicant claims, he told a p etty o fficer about the harassment and nothing was done —so he decided to go UA and c o me out about his sex ual orientation. In the Applicant administrative separation letter, the Commanding Officer stated that: “When Seaman O**** returned to military control, his story changed from unsatisfactory living conditions to ridicule for being a homosexual.” 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 his issue. In initial correspondence to the Applicant, the NDRB advised him on providing the Board with documentation to support any claims of impropriety and equity. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the Applicant produced any evidence to support the contention that he was harass ed and that he request ed help from his command. The Applicant’s statements alone do not overcome the government’s presumption of regularity in this case.

The Board did note in the Applicant’s record the
memorandum from his commanding officer (recommendation for separation)….
(add remarks from CO here…these are significant in refuting his claim)

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 | 2010_Navy | ND1001049

    Original file (ND1001049.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.Applicant seeks an upgrade to obtain veterans benefits.2. Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries and administrative separation process, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reason for separation shall remain .The Applicant...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101303

    Original file (ND1101303.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends there was no basis for separation due to a pattern of misconduct. 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 , but the Narrative Reason for Separation shall change to...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001225

    Original file (ND1001225.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. DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001449

    Original file (ND1001449.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/To Congress member: Pertinent Regulation/Law A.Naval Military Personnel...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101555

    Original file (ND1101555.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After careful consideration, the NDRB determined that the Applicant was aware of his rights and that he had ample opportunity to defend himself by presenting an adequate defense at NJP or demanding trial by court-martial.Relief denied.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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900869

    Original file (ND0900869.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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.While the Board applauds the Applicant’s post service efforts, the Board determined the statement regarding post-service conduct were not...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101205

    Original file (ND1101205.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 | 2010_Navy | ND1000404

    Original file (ND1000404.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB determined that the basis for separation due to Misconduct (Civilian Conviction) was improper.However, the Applicant was notified of separation processing for two reasons. Since the charge and specifications alleged against the Applicant would warrant a punitive discharge and confinement, if adjudicated by a special or general court-martial, the recommendation and processing for administrative separation pursuant to Misconduct (Commission of a Serious Offense) was in accordance...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901060

    Original file (ND0901060.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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000768

    Original file (ND1000768.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.Applicant seeks a discharge upgrade to obtain G.I. ” 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. If the action includes either a punitive or administrative discharge for misconduct or for any...