Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0902047
Original file (ND0902047.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-AZAR, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20090714
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)        20041129 - 20050926     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20050927     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20090430      Highest Rank/Rate: AZAN
Length of Service : Y ear ( s ) M onth ( s ) 04 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 70
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 3.0 ( 6 )      Behavior: 1.8 ( 6 )        OTA: 2.60

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):     

Periods of C ONF : 20070803-20070902

NJP :

- 20070803:      Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation)
         Article 86 (Absence without leave)
         Awarded: CONF (30 days)  Suspended: NONE

- 20090220 :      Article (Insubordinate conduct toward a Warrant Officer, Noncommissioned Officer or Petty Officer)
         Article
(Failure to obey order or regulation - dereliction of duty)
         Awarded:
Suspended:

- 20090330 :      Article (Absence without leave)
         Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation)

         Awarded:
Suspended:

S CM :

- 20080504 :       Art icle (Failure to obey order or regulation - dereliction of duty)
         Article 134 (Adultery)
         Sentence :

SPCM:    C C :

Retention Warning Counseling :

         - 20080504       Conviction at Summary Court-Martial for violation of UCMJ Articles 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation – dereliction of duty) and Article 134 (Adultery)


Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

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

         GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)

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), Change 23, effective 20 May 2008 until 9 November 2009,
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 enlist in the U.S. Army Reserve.
2.       Post-service conduct.

Decision
Date: 20 10 0628             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. The Applicant’s record of service included NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13) warnings, for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 86 ( Absence without leave , 2 separate NJPs ) , Article 91 ( Insubordinate conduct toward a warrant officer, noncommissioned officer , or petty officer), and Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation , 3 separate NJPs ) , and for of the UCMJ: Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation - dereliction of duty) and Article 134 (Adultery) . Based on the offenses committed by the Applicant, command administratively processed for separation. The NDRB did not have the Applicant’s administrative separation package to determine whether or not the Applicant waived rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request an administrative board or a General Court-Martial Convening Authority review .

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant would like to enlist in the U.S. Army Reserve. 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 http://www.donhq.navy.mil/bcnr/bcnr.htm) 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 U.S. Army Reserve recruiter.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends that since her discharge she has been an exceptional citizen, scholar, and employee. She currently attends Columbus State University with an expected graduation date of December 2012, works in the Department of Parks and Recreation , and contributes to several community service events. The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. Documentation to help support a post - service conduct upgrade includes, but is not limited to , a verifiable continuous employment record; marriage and children’s birth certificate s (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; official transcripts from higher education; and documentation of a drug - free lifestyle. The Applicant provided official college transcripts and five letters of references. While the Applicant’s achievements since her discharge from the Navy are commendable, there is an inadequate amount of observable time necessary to substantiate a change of life style to warrant an upgrade based on post-service conduct. If the Applicant still desires to pursue an upgrade to honorable, the NDRB recommends waiting at least 5 years before applying for a personal appearance hearing.

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 15 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 | 2009_Navy | ND0900626

    Original file (ND0900626.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB determined the awarded discharge characterization was appropriate and an upgrade founded upon the Applicant’s admission to consensual homosexual act would be inappropriate.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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000985

    Original file (ND1000985.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant desires to become fully eligible for the GI Bill. The Applicant desires to reenlist in the military. ” 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 | 2014_Navy | ND1401297

    Original file (ND1401297.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant wants an upgrade of his discharge to General, and reentry (RE) code to RE-2, for better employment opportunities. Representation: 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1500755

    Original file (MD1500755.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant completed his first enlistment period with a general (under honorable conditions) characterization of service for that period of service. Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall remain GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS) and the narrative reason for separation shall remain COMPLETION OF REQUIRED ACTIVE SERVICE . ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the...

  • USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201233

    Original file (MD1201233.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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801554

    Original file (MD0801554.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 92 (Failure to obey orders or regulations), and Article 134 (Adultery). With a vote of 5-0,the Board found the discharge was proper but not equitable in that the violations were limited enough to rate a “General (Under Honorable Conditions)” rather than the awarded “Under Other Than Honorable...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700687

    Original file (MD0700687.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s conduct during the current period of service, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service was marred by the award of two retention warnings and found guilty at a Special Courts-Martial for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Article92 (Failure to obey a lawful order, Failure to obey a lawful regulation, Dereliction of Duty), Article 107 [False Official Statement (two specifications)], and Article 134 (Adultery). After a thorough...

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1101695

    Original file (MD1101695.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Therefore, after reviewing the Applicant’s issues, supporting documents and the evidence of record, the NDRB discerned no impropriety or inequity with the Applicant’s separation and that the characterization of service, as issued, was warranted. 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201890

    Original file (MD1201890.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. Paragraph 6213 of the Marine...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1300573

    Original file (ND1300573.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities. 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...