Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901333
Original file (ND0901333.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-PSSN, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20090421
Characterization of Service Received:
Narrative Reason for Discharge:
Authority for Discharge: MILPERSMAN 1910-104 (COMPLETION OF REQUIRED ACTIVE SERVICE)

 Applicant’s Request: Characterization change to:
                  Narrative Reason change to:

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive:         US N R (DEP)        20011128 - 20020116     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment: 20020117     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years 18 months Extension
Date of Discharge: 20070716      Highest Rank/Rate: PSSN
Length of Service : Y ear ( s ) M onth ( s ) 00 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 58
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 2.0 ( 6 )      Behavior: 2.0 ( 6 )        OTA: 2.31

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      ESWS

NJP :
- 20070310 :       Art icle 86 (Unauthorized absence - Failure to go to appointed place of duty: 20070220 – 20070221)
                  Awarded : Susp ended :

- 20070504 :      Article 112 ( Drunk on Duty )
         Articl e 134 (Drunk and Disorderly: 2 specifications )
                  Awarded: Suspended:

- 20070605 :       Article 92 ( Failure to obey lawful order )
                  Awarded : CONF Susp ended:

S CM : SPCM: C C :

Retention Warning Counseling :
- 20070310 :       For failure to go to appointed place of duty that led to your non-judicial punishment.


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 : ( Evaluations )


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

Applicant’s Issues

 1. The Applicant claims impropriety in the characterization of his discharge.

Decision

Date : 20 0 9 1217    Location: Washington D.C .       R epresentation :

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 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 NAV PERS 1070/613 (Page 13) warning and nonjudicial punishments (NJP’s) for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 86 (Unauthorized absence- failure to go to appointed place of duty), Article 92 (Failure to obey lawful order : 3 specifications ) , Article 112 (Drunk on Duty) and Articl e 134 (Drunk and Disorderly: 2 specifications ). In addition, the NDRB noted that on one of his last evaluations , t he Applicant failed the S pring 2007 body co mposition assessment (BCA) and the physical fitness assessment (PFA), which was his third PFA failure in a four year period. This in itself would warrant mandatory separation processing for PFA failure had the Applicant not reached the end of his obligated service. Although the Applicant had numerous acts of misconduct , he was allowed to complete his obligated service. T hus his character of s ervice was based on his overall trait ass essment (OTA) in the Navy.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends that he was unjustly given a General discharge after he completed his required obligated service. Pursuant to MILPERSMAN 1910-104, a member separated upon expiration of enlistment or fulfillment of service obligation is eligible for a characterization of honorable, unless a general is warranted on the basis of the Enlisted Performance Evaluation System; a member is eligible for a general (under honorable conditions), if during the current enlistment, the member’s final evaluation average is 2.49 or below. The Applicant’s service record reflects his final evaluation trait average for this period of enlistment was 2.31, which consisted of 6 observed and one non-observed (7 total) enlisted performance e valuation s . The evaluation marks are as follows: non-observed, 2.67, 2.83, 2.83, 2.83, 1.43, and 1.29. The NDRB opined that the Applicant’s misconduct in the last 4 months of enlistment, to include his third BFA and PFA failure, accounted for his below average evaluation marks. The Applicant’s overall trait average for this enlistment is below that required for an honorable; therefore the Board determined that a general (under honorable conditions) characterization is most appropriate. R elief is denied.

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 Additi onal Reviews and Post-Service Conduct .


Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A. The Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 11, effective 20 June 2005 until Present, Article 1910-104, SEPARATION BY REASON OF EXPIRATION OF ACTIVE OBLIGATED SERVICE (EAOS) , states:
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.

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 | ND1001768

    Original file (ND1001768.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)20030116 - 20030924Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20030925Age at Enlistment:Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20090924Highest Rank/Rate:EM3Length of Service: Years Months00 DaysEducation Level:AFQT: 99EvaluationMarks:Performance:3.8(9)Behavior:1.9(9)OTA: 3.35Awards and Decorations (per DD 214): (2)Periods of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301241

    Original file (ND1301241.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: DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801108

    Original file (ND0801108.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1400758

    Original file (ND1400758.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: DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201849

    Original file (ND1201849.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant requests an upgrade to receive G.I. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1401604

    Original file (ND1401604.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)19981119 - 19981214Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 19981215Age at Enlistment:Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20031214Highest Rank/Rate:AE3Length of Service:Year(s)Month(s) 00 Day(s)Education Level:AFQT: 31EvaluationMarks:Performance:3.9(7)Behavior:3.3(7)OTA: 3.45Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):(2) (2)...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901145

    Original file (ND0901145.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. Although not raised by the Applicant, the Board reviewed the Applicant’s awarded characterization of discharge following his completed obligated service. ” 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201252

    Original file (ND1201252.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)20020518 - 20020603Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20020604Age at Enlistment:Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20060630Highest Rank/Rate:FNLength of Service:Year(s)Month(s) 27 Day(s)Education Level:AFQT: 32EvaluationMarks:Performance:2.7(3)Behavior:2.3(3)OTA: 2.33Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):TL per...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800652

    Original file (ND0800652.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Types of Documents Submitted/ REVIEWED Related 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101452

    Original file (ND1101452.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    During the Board’s review of the Applicant’s record of service and discharge process, the NDRB identified an inequity in the Applicant’s characterization of service and determined that the Applicant warrants an upgrade on the basis of the Enlisted Performance Evaluation System. Relief granted.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...