Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901716
Original file (ND0901716.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-AZAR, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20090604
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)        20010926 - 20010927     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Current Enlistment: 20010928     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20030417      Highest Rank/Rate: AZAA
Length of Service : Y ear ( s ) M onth ( s ) 00 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 50
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 2.5 ( 2 )      Behavior: 1.0 ( 2 )        OTA: 2.09

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):     

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP :
- 20030117 :      Article (U nauthorized absence - 2 specifications )
         Specification 1: From appointed place of duty on 20021112 and 20021120.
         Specification 2: From organization on 20021219.
         Article (False official statement – with intent to deceive about being robbed and beat up )
          Awarded: Suspended:

S CM :
- 20030307 :       Article (Larceny and wrongful appropriation), 3 specifications
          Specification 1: On or about 20021223 steal a credit card.
         Specification 2: On or about 20030108 steal a credit card.
         Specification 3: On or about 20030114 steal a credit card.
          Article (General – obtaining services under false pretenses on or about 20030108 )
          Sentence:

SPCM:

C C :

Retention Warning Counseling:
- 20030117 :      For violation of articles 86 (UA) and 107 (False official statement) awarded CO’s NJP.







Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

The NDRB did note administrative error(s) on the original DD Form 214:

         “ ”
         “ ”

The NDRB will recommend to the Commander, Navy Personnel Command, that the DD 214 be corrected as appropriate.

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), 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 .


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

Applicant’s Issues

 1. The Applicant seeks an upgrade for employment and educational benefits.       
2. The Applicant states he has changed his life around.  

Decision

Date: 20 10 0318 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 discharge 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. T he Board did complete a thorough review of the circumstances which led to discharge and the discharge process to ensure discharge met the pertinent sta ndards of equity and propriety. The Applicant’s record of service included NAV PERS 1070/613 (Page 13) warning , for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 86 (Unauthorized absence - 2 specifications: one failure to go and one UA for 4 days); and for of the UCMJ: Article 121 (Larceny - 3 spec ifications of stealing another S ailor’s credit card) and Article 134 (obtaining services under false pretenses by using stolen credit card). Based on the offenses committed by the Applicant, command administratively processed for separation. When notified of administrative separation processing using the procedure, the Applicant exercised rights to consult with a qualifi ed counsel and to submit a written statement, but waived his right to request an administrative board .

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant seeks an upgrade for employment and educational benefits. 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.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends he has changed his life around and deserves an upgrade . During his enlistment in the Navy, the command described the Applic ant as having a history of lying and deceit. 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 the service. T he Board determined the Applicant’s statement regarding post-service conduct without documentation to support the same, was not sufficient to form a basis of relief. To warrant an upgrade the Applicant’s post service efforts need to be more encompassing. The Applicant could have produced additional e vidence as stated in the Post-Service Conduct paragraph in the addendum with the full understanding completion of these items alone does not guarantee an upgrade. The Applicant should provide documentation which could include but not limited to: letters of personal references and verifiable employment record /letter of recommendation from his employers; evidence of a drug free life style (completion of rehab/proof he attended Narcotics Anonymous or AA meetings); certification of non-involvement with civil authorities , evidence of financial stability (home ownership/home rental history, credit card payments); college transcripts; documentation of community /church service ; a nd if married, a marriage certificate. The Applicant should be aware completion of these items alone does not guarantee an upgrade from an unfavorable discharge as each discharge is reviewed by the Board on a case by case basis to determine if post service conduct mitigates the reason for the characterization of discharge.

The NDRB determined the characteriz ation of service received, “ Under Other Than Honorable Conditions”, was an appropriate characterization considering the length of service and the UCMJ violations involved. Relief 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 Additional Reviews, Employment /Educational Opportunities 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

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0902349

    Original file (MD0902349.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. The Applicant should be aware submission of these items alone does not guarantee clemency as each discharge is reviewed by the NDRB on a case-by-case basis.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 BAD...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0601051

    Original file (ND0601051.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Elements of Discharge: [INVOLUNTARY] Discharge Process: Date Notified:20030117Reason for Discharge erroneous entryLeast Favorable Characterization: Date Applicant Responded to Notification: 20030117Rights Elected at Notification:Consult with Counsel Administrative Board Obtain Copies Submit Statement Discharge directed by (date):COMMANDING OFFICER 20030123Narrative reason directed:ERRONEOUS ENTRYCharacterization directed: UNCHARACTERIZED Date Applicant Discharged: 20030128 Additional...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001175

    Original file (ND1001175.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. Separation for personality...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901896

    Original file (ND0901896.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    However, even if the Applicant could have produced additional evidence to support a review based on his post-service conduct, the Applicant must have a full understanding that post-service conduct alone does not guarantee an upgrade.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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001010

    Original file (ND1001010.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 opportunities2. ” 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 | 2012_Navy | ND1201455

    Original file (ND1201455.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    With multiple serious UCMJ violations (Articles 92, 107, and 121) in less than 11 months of service, the Applicant met the requirements for administrative separation for Misconduct (Serious Offense) and warranted an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions characterization of service.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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000906

    Original file (ND1000906.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. ” 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 purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities.

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1001133

    Original file (MD1001133.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Advised that you are being processed for administrative separation for a pattern of misconduct. The Separation Authority reviewed the Command’s recommendation for separation; he determined that the Applicant’s documented record of service established the minimum requirements for discharge based on a pattern of misconduct; that separation in the Applicant’s case was warranted; and further, that the proposed characterization of service - Under Other Than Honorable Conditions - was warranted. ...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0902252

    Original file (ND0902252.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)20060616 - 20060727Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20060728Age at Enlistment:Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20081024Highest Rank/Rate:MMFNLength of Service: Year(s)Month(s)27 Day(s)Education Level:AFQT: 45EvaluationMarks:Performance:4.0(1)Behavior:3.0(1)OTA: 3.43Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):Periods of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1102168

    Original file (ND1102168.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant seeks an upgrade due to passage of time.2. The NDRB acknowledges the Applicant’s desire to provide a better life for himself and his family, however, this issue does not serve to provide a foundation upon which the Board can grant relief. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance...