Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0902569
Original file (ND0902569.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-MM3, 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)        19980331 - 19980413     Active:            19980414 - 20010830

Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Current Enlistment: 20010831     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20050211      Highest Rank/Rate: MM2
Length of Service : Y ear ( s ) M onth ( s ) 12 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 34
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 3.5 ( 2 )      Behavior: 3.5 ( 2 )        OTA: 3.64

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      (2) CGMUC (2) (2) (2) MUC (2) ESWS

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP :

S CM :

- 20041001 :      Article (False official statements) , 2 specifications
         Specification 1: April 2002 – November 2003 Record of Emergency Data was false
         Specification 2: Jul y 2002 travel voucher that stated he traveled with two dependents was false.
         Article (Larceny and wrongful appropriation – on divers occasions April 2002 – January 2004, steal $20,340.33, property of US government )
          Sentence:

SPCM: C C : Retention Warning Counseling: NFIR

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: “ NAVY E RIBBON, COAST GUARD MERITORIOUS UNIT COMMENDATION , MER I TORIOUS UNIT COMMENDATION (2), ARMED FORCES EXPEDITIONARY MEDAL (2), SEA SERVICE DEPLOYMENT RIBBON (3), NATIONAL DEFENSE SERVICE MEDAL, GOOD CONDUCT MEDAL, ENLISTED SURFACE WARFARE SPECIALIST ”
          “CONTINUOUS HONORABLE ACTIVE SERVICE FROM 980414 UNTIL 010830 ”

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 s 107 and 121 .


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

Applicant’s Issues

 1. C lerical error on the part of the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS).
2. Inadequate representation .

Decision

Date: 20 10 1014             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 one summary court-martial (SCM) for violations o f the Uniform Code of Mil itary Justice (UCMJ): Article 107 ( False official statement, 2 specifications: April 2002-November 2003 Record of Emergency Data was false, and the July 2002 travel voucher that stated he traveled with two dependents was false ) and Article 121 ( Larceny and wrongful appropriation on divers occasions between April 2002-January 2004, steal $20,340.33, the property of the US Government). Based on the offenses committed by the Applicant, his command administratively processed him for separation. When notified of administrative separation processing using the administrative board procedure, the Applicant waived his rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request an administrative board .
Issue 1 : (Nondecisional) The Applicant contends his misconduct was based on a clerical error on the part of DFAS. The NDRB has no authority to verify or correct military pay issue s. Regulations limit the NDRB’s review to a determination of the propriety and equity of the discharge.

Issue 2 : (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends he had inadequate representation. He stated, “By the advice of my TD Officer, I entered a plea of No Contest as I was counseld [counseled] that this was a pay issue that was not such that my career would be influenced to the point of a discharge such as resulted.” The Applicant waived his rights to consult with qualified counsel or a civilian counsel at his own expense and request an administrative board. Had the Applicant elected the administrative board, he had the right to representation at the administrative board by either a qualified counsel or a civilian counsel at his own expense. Furthermore, the Applicant pled guilty to the charges against him at the SCM. The NDRB determined this issue is without merit.

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 | 2010_Navy | ND1000864

    Original file (ND1000864.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB determined that the Applicant’s post-service effort does not warrant clemency.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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801840

    Original file (ND0801840.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: or Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USNR (DEP)20060710 - 20061120Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20061121Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20071116Highest Rank/Rate: SKSALength of Service: Years Months16 DaysEducation Level:AFQT: 51EvaluationMarks:Performance:4.0(1)Behavior:1.0(1)OTA: 2.83Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):Rifle Pistol...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1401221

    Original file (ND1401221.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    During the document review and the Personal Hearing, the Applicant’s record of service, documentation sent in by the Applicant for in-service and post-service conduct, as well as any statements made written or verbal are examined to see if relief is in order. 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 UNDER...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901378

    Original file (ND0901378.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant contends his discharge, based on a conviction at a SPCM, was unjust because he had an illegitimate dependent child (but didn’t know “ where he was or how to contact the mother ” ), and thus, was justified in receiving government funds for a dependent. ” 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1300011

    Original file (ND1300011.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    When notified of administrative separation processing using the procedure, the Applicant elected rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request an administrative board, however, the NDRB found no evidence in the record to show the Applicant appeared before an administrative separation board. In the Applicant’s third enlistment, the NDRB determined, even after reviewing the 13 character references, that he warranted a discharge Under Other Than Honorable...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101297

    Original file (ND1101297.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After reading the Applicant’s statement and reviewing the record of service, the NDRB determined that the discharge was proper and equitable and that relief based on this issue 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801048

    Original file (ND0801048.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 Applicant’s record of...

  • USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201871

    Original file (MD1201871.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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200624

    Original file (ND1200624.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant seeks to have his re-entry code changed.2. 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 service and the reason for discharge if such change is warranted.In...

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0800780

    Original file (MD0800780.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 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, Service Record, Discharge Process and...