Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0902525
Original file (ND0902525.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-ADAR, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20090917
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)        20001108 - 20010703     Active:  
         USNR (DEP)        20010919 - 20020202

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20020203     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20021003      Highest Rank/Rate: ADAA
Length of Service : Y ear ( s ) M onth ( s ) 01 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 91
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 2.0 ( 1 )      Behavior: 1.0 ( 1 )        OTA: 1.67

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):     

NJP :

- 20020 5 10 :       Article 86 (Absence without leave , 20020419-20020423, 5 days )
         Awarded : Susp ended: RIR Vacated 20020710

- 2002082 2 :       Article 86 (Absence without leave 20020709-20020808, 30 days)
         Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation)
          Awarded : CC 30 days Susp ended: NONE

- 20020911:      Article 86 (Absence without leave, NFIR)
         Article 134 (Driving on base with suspended license)

 S CM :   

SPCM:   

C C :     

Periods of CONF :

Retention Warning Counseling :

- 20020425 :       For violation of Article 86 - Unauthorized absence 20020419-20020423 ( 5 days ) .

- 20020822 :       For violation of Article 86 - Unauthorized absence 20020709-20020808 (29 days) .
                           Article 92 - Failure to obey order or regulation, underage drinking



Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

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

         “ 02 APR 19 TO 02 APR 23; 02 JUL 09 TO 02 AUG 08 ”
         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 1910-140, 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.        Applicant desires upgrade to obtain better job opportunities.
2.       Applicant contends his personal stressors contributed to his misconduct , which led to his separation.
 3 .       Applicant contends a medical condition caused him to make irrational decisions , which led to his misconduct.
Decision
Date: 20 10 10 14             Location: Washington D.C .        R epresentation : CA DEPT OF VET AFFAIRS

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 Board complete d a thorough review of the circumstances that 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 NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13) warnings for unauthorized absence ( 5 days , 29 days ) and underage drinking and for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 86 (Absence without leave) , Article 92 ( Failure to obey order, regulation - underage drinking ), and Article 134 ( Driving on base with suspended license ) . Based on the multiple offe nses committed by the Applicant within his first 7 months of active duty service , command 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 of rebuttal , and request a General Court-Martial Convening Authority review.

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant desires an upgrade to obtain better job 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.

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant contends his personal life stressors contributed to his misconduct , which led to his separation. There is no evidence in the record, nor did the Applicant provide any evidence , to indicate he attempted to u se the numerous services available for service members who undergo personal problems during their enlistment , such as the Navy Chaplain, Medical or Mental Health professionals, Navy Relief Society, Family Advocacy Programs, or even the Red Cross.
The NDRB recognizes that serving in the U.S. Navy is challenging. Nevertheless, personal issues and life stressors do not mitigate misconduct and provide no basis for which the NDRB can grant relief.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends a medical condition caused him to make irrational decisions , which led to his misconduct. The Applicant claims his problems can be attributed to poor decision making that was a result of injury sustained from heat stroke. In reviewing discharges, t he government enjoys a presumption of regularity in the conduct of its affairs. The Applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support his issue. The NDRB found no medical diagnosis in the record to support the Applicant's claim nor did the Applicant produce any medical diagnosis by competent medical authority to support his claim. While he may feel that this was the underlying cause of his misconduct, the record clearly reflects his willful misconduct and demonstrated he was unfit for further service. The evidence of record did not show that the Applicant was either not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions. Relief denied.

S ummary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s s ummary of s ervice, r ecord e ntries, and administrative 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

  • USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1301474

    Original file (MD1301474.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700318

    Original file (ND0700318.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s service was marred by two retention warnings, the award of six nonjudicial punishment (NJP), Article 86 (Unauthorized Absence), Article 87 (Missing Movement), and Article 92 (Disobeying a lawful order). 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 Applicant, the Board found that Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214 The NDRB...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901668

    Original file (ND0901668.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On page 4, Item 7, in the instructions for completion of DD Form 293, the Applicant is notified to submit evidence "which substantiate or relate directly to your issues" (Issues: Why an upgrade or change is requested and justification for the request). 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. ”...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700037

    Original file (MD0700037.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Had misconduct as a basis for discharge been found to be supported by the evidence, regulations provide that it would be the appropriate basis even when a personality disorder exists. 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 Applicant, the Board found the Applicant’s discharge proper and equitable. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document...

  • USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201657

    Original file (MD1201657.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ” After reviewing the record of service, post-service medical documentation, and character reference letters, the NDRB determined his diagnosis was proper and that no change to the narrative reason for separation is warranted.The Applicant was administratively separated and not separated upon expiration of enlistment or fulfillment of service obligation. Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries,...

  • USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1500348

    Original file (MD1500348.rtf) Auto-classification: 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 remain BAD CONDUCT DISCHARGE and the narrative reason for separation shall remain COURT-MARTIAL . 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000371

    Original file (ND1000371.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall IN LIEU OF TRIAL BY COURT MARTIAL.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. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901357

    Original file (MD0901357.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. After careful consideration, the NDRB found the Applicant’s contention to be without merit.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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901849

    Original file (ND0901849.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ” 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. Additionally, the NDRB does not have the authority to change a narrative reason for separation to one indicating a medical disability or...

  • USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1301497

    Original file (MD1301497.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a thorough review of the Applicant’s records, the NDRB determined clemency was not warranted. ” 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. 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...