Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901564
Original file (ND0901564.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-SKSN, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20090512
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)        20011025 - 20020 597     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20050506     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years
Date of Discharge: 20080205      Highest Rank/Rate: SKSN
Length of Service : Y ear ( s ) M onth ( s ) 00 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 47
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 3.3 ( 3 )      Behavior: 3.0 ( 3 )        OTA: 3.48

Awards and Decorations:  

Period s of UA /C ONF :

NJP :             SCM:    SPCM:          CC:

Retention Warning Counseling :

- 20071117 :       For delinquent for more than 60 days on your government travel credit card for the amount of $2579.89.

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 1910-140, 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 .


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

Applicant’s Issues

 1.       Wants to reenlist in the Navy.
2. Wants his reenlistment (RE) code change d .
3 .       Record of service.

Decision

Date: 20 10 0331             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 NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13) warning, and no misconduct which resulted in nonjudicial pu nishment (NJP) or court-martial. Ho wever, members may be separated for a pattern of misconduct if they have a set pattern of failure to pay just debts. A ccording to his commanding officer, the Applicant failed to pay his just debt in which his Government Travel credit card was more than 160 days delinquent. Based on the Applicant’s failure to pay his Government credit card, he was administratively processed for separation. When notified of administrative separation processing using the procedure, the Applicant waived rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request a General Court-Martial Co nvening Authority (GCMA) review .

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant is requesting to get his RE code change in order to reenlist in the Navy. 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.
: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends that his record of service should be taken into account based on his evaluation while in service. The Applicant’s Commanding Officer recommended a General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization, but the Separation Authority made the final decision to discharge the Applicant with an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions characterization. The Applicant provided copies of his Evaluation Report and a certificate for successful completion of phase IV trai ning requirements. The characterization of service is a description of the total service provided during the member’s enlistment. discharge is warranted when significant negative aspects of a member’s conduct or performance of duty outweigh the positive aspects of the member’s military recor d. The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of service, met the requirements of service for a General discharge . However, the fact that he failed to pay his debts and was discharged because of this misconduct makes an Honorable discharge inappropriate. The Board determined an upgrade of the character of his dis charge to General is warranted .

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 Disabled American 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 their 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 | 2015_Navy | ND1501169

    Original file (ND1501169.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. The VA conducts its own determination of eligibility based on service records and input from an Applicant upon their request. ” 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.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700696

    Original file (ND0700696.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    As of this time, the Applicant has not provided any post- service documentation to consider mitigating the misconduct that resulted in the characterization 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 does not have the authority to change a narrative reason for separation to one indicating a...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1400762

    Original file (ND1400762.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant seeks an upgrade to enhance employment opportunities.2. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001868

    Original file (ND1001868.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    : (Nondecisional) The Applicant contends that he should have been given separation pay.The NDRB has no jurisdiction over separation pay as regulations limit the NDRB’s review to a determination of the propriety and equity of the discharge.Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records can make determinations related to separation pay. Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries and the administrative...

  • USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1200054

    Original file (MD1200054.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 .Since 15 years have elapsed since the date of his discharge, the Applicant is not eligible for a personal appearance hearing. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101305

    Original file (ND1101305.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    : (Non-decisional) The Applicant wants his discharge upgraded so he can reenlist in the military. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100758

    Original file (ND1100758.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 | 2007_Navy | ND0700241

    Original file (ND0700241.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PERSONAL CONDUCT; FINANCIAL CONSIDERATION : 20010301: Your Credit Bureau Report disclosed the following: * ALLTEL charged off $428.00 in July 1997. Date Applicant Responded to Notification:20021108 Rights Elected at Notification: Consult with Counsel Obtain Copies of Documents Submit Statement(s) (date) Administrative Board GCMCA review Commanding Officer Recommendation (date): N/A (LOCAL SEPARATION) Separation Authority (date): COMMANDING OFFICER, NAVAL HOSPTIAL, GREAT LAKES, ILLINOIS...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1500397

    Original file (ND1500397.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The record clearly shows that the written counseling and notification of separation proceedings were for her Pattern of Misconduct - Failure to Pay Just Debts and she was subsequently discharged for the same. 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 GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS) and the narrative...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901014

    Original file (ND0901014.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Based on a review of the evidence of record and statement submitted by the Applicant, the NDRB determined that there was sufficient evidence to support a discharge based on fraudulent enlistment. The Applicant also contends that an upgrade is justified based on the fact that he honorably served his country for 40months, excelled at his rating and received awards.Taking into consideration the Applicant’s overall record and hisconduct,which reflected his willful failure to meet the...