Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0902213
Original file (ND0902213.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-EMFR, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20090805
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)        200 1 1018 - 20011114     Active:            20000308 - 20000608 ELS

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20011115     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20030610      Highest Rank/Rate: EMFN
Length of Service : Y ear ( s ) M onth ( s ) 26 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 49
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 1.0 ( 1 )      Behavior: 1.0 ( 1 )        OTA: 1.17

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):     

Periods of UA : 20020805- 20021209 ( 126 days ); 20030210-20030603 (112 days )

NJP :
- 200 21209 :      Article (Desertion)
         Article 86 (U nauthorized absence for 126 days )
         Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation) [Extracted from Evaluation Report and Counseling Record dated 20030610.]
         Awarded : NFIR Susp ended: NFIR
- 20030604 :      Article (Desertion for 112 d ays , which ended in apprehension )
         Article (Missing ship’s movement)
         Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation)
          Awarded : Susp ended:

S CM : SPCM:

C C : Retention Warning Counseling :


Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

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

          Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, should read: “ NATIONAL DEFENSE SERVICE MEDAL ”
         “ UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS ”
         “ MILPERSMAN 1910-142 ”

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 April 2005, 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 (Desertion) , Article 86 (Unauthorized absence greater than 30 days), Article (Missing ship’s movement) , and Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation) .


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

Applicant’s Issues

 1. The Applicant seeks an upgrade to reenlist/ RE-code into the Armed Forces.
 2. The Applicant contends his misconduct was due to personal problems (family) while in the Navy.

Decision

Date: 2010 0810 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 governmental affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant. The Board did complete a thorough review of the circumstances that led to discharge and the discharge process to ensure discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety. The Applicant’s record of service included for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article (Desertion - 2 specifications: UA for 112 days that ended in apprehension ), Article 86 (Unauthorized absence for 126 days ), Article (Missing ship’s movement) , and Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation – 2 specifications ) . 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 exercised or waived rights to consult with a qualified counsel, to submit a written statement for consideration by the separating authority, and to request an administrative board .

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant seeks an upgrade to reenlist into the Armed Forces. 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 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 his misconduct was due to personal problems (family) while in the Navy. The Applicant provided no documented information he informed his chain of command of family problems and did not receive the assistance, leave, or help he asked for. Additionally, the Applicant makes no mention of, nor provides documented proof, if he attempted to use any of the numerous family support programs sponsored by or for military service members , such as Family Advocacy, Navy – Marine Corps Relief Society, Red Cross, c haplain, or Navy medical health personnel. The Applicant’s offenses are considered serious offenses that could have resulted in a punitive discharge (i.e., Bad Conduct or Dishonorable) and confinement if adjudicated and awarded as part of a sentence by a special or general court - martial. The command did not refer the Applicant for a court - martial but opted instead for an administrative discharge. Due to the seriousness of the offenses committed during the Applicant’s 19 months in the service, the Board ruled that an upgrade is not warranted. 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. The Applicant is directed to the Addendum, specifically the paragraphs titled Additional Reviews, Reenlistment/RE-code, 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 | 2008_Navy | ND0801842

    Original file (ND0801842.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Record of service. 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.The Applicant has requested a discharge characterization upgrade to “Honorable”. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700615

    Original file (ND0700615.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    ex-HN, USN ND07-00615 Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request Application Received: 20070409 Characterization Received: Narrative Reason: MISCONDUCT-COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE Authority: MILPERSMAN 1910-142 Applicant’s Request: Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Applicant’s Issues: 1. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Medical and Service Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900913

    Original file (ND0900913.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, service record entries, discharge process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found By a unanimous vote of 5-0, the Board determined the characterization of service received, Under Other Than Honorable Conditions), and the narrative reason for the...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900997

    Original file (MD0900997.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.Applicant request upgrade based on helping NCIS. Clemency 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 . ” Additional Reviews : After a document...

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0800581

    Original file (MD0800581.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall MISCONDUCT.Discussion : either which the Board cannot form the basis of relief for the Applicant, or the Board does not have the authority to grant the relief for which the Applicant petitioned. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Medical and Service Record, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found that Pertinent Regulation/Law A. Paragraph 6210, MISCONDUCT...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800738

    Original file (ND0800738.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board determined the characterization of service received, “ Under Other Than Honorable Conditions”, was an appropriate characterization considering the length of service and the UCMJ violations involved, and based on the lack of documentation provided an upgrade would be inappropriate.The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing andis directed to the Addendum, specifically the paragraphs concerning Additional Reviews and Automatic Upgrades .Should the Applicant feel...

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1001925

    Original file (MD1001925.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Decisional Issue: (Clemency/Equity) CLEMENCY NOT WARRANTED. Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall BAD CONDUCT DISCHARGE and the narrative reason for separation shall remain . ” 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 | 2009_Navy | ND0900533

    Original file (ND0900533.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board determined the awarded discharge was appropriate and an upgrade 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 responsive to the issues you raised, or does not otherwise comport with the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801866

    Original file (ND0801866.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. Record of service. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years from the date of discharge.

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1000418

    Original file (MD1000418.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    As regulations limit the NDRB’s review solely to a determination of clemency under the pertinent standards of equity, this issue does not serve to provide a foundation upon which the Board can grant relief. Relief denied Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, the verbatim transcript record of trial by Special Court-Martial, and the discharge process, the Board found that Therefore, the awarded...