Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000044
Original file (ND1000044.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-AN, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20090930
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)        19990624 - 19990822     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 19990823     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20020612      Highest Rank/Rate: AN
Length of Service : Y ear ( s ) M onth ( s ) 20 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 40
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 2.5 ( 2 )      Behavior: 3.0 ( 2 )        OTA: 2.84

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):     

Periods of UA /C ONF : 20011028- 20020517 ( 202 days ) / CONF:

NJP :
- 20010404 :       Article 86 (Unauthorized absence - 3 specifications) - e xtracted from Evaluation dated 15 July 2001.

S CM :

SPCM: The NDRB presumes that charges were preferred to a Special Court-Martial for violations of the UCMJ: Article 86 (Unauthorized absence for 202 days). The Applicant requested to be separated in lieu of trial by court-martial. The command and separating authority approved his request , and he was discharged accordingly.

C C :

Retention Warning Counseling :

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:           Rehabilitation/Treatment:                  Criminal Records:       
         Personal Documentation :           Community Service:                References:     
         Department of VA letter:                  Oth er Documentation:    
                  Additional Statements :
          From Applicant:            From /To Representation:            From /To Congress m ember :        



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

Applicant’s Issues
1. The Applicant contends his discharge is inequita ble , because he was injured in an auto accident.

Decision
Date: 2010 1104 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 86 (Unauthorized absence - 3 specifications) . C harges were preferred to a Special Court-Martial for violations of the UCMJ: Article 86 (Unauthorized absence for 202 days). The Applicant requested to be separated in lieu of trial by court-martial. The command and separating authority approved his request , and he was discharged accordingly.
: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his discharge is inequitable , because he was injured in an auto accident. Due to lack of documentation in the Applicant’s service record, t he NDRB is unable to determine the direct relationship between the auto accident and the 202 - day unauthorized absence. His period of unauthorized absence started on 28 October 2001, yet the Final Narrative Report that he submitted states that his auto accident occurred on 15 December 2001. Besides being UA for six weeks before the accident, the Applicant was not hospitalized and provides no proof that he attempted to contact the Navy after the accident. Additionally, the NDRB presumes that the command properly evaluated the situation and the circumstances surrounding the auto accident and unauthorized absence and made a consci ous decision in the best interest of the Navy. The NDRB does n o t have the Applicant’s separation package but presumes all procedures were followed , to include signing a statement, from the Applicant, requesting an administrative discharge under other than honorable conditions in lieu of a trial by court-martial. Prior to signing this request, it is assumed that the Applicant consulted with counsel and was fully advised of the implications of his request. Based on these assumptions, the Applicant understood that if discharged under other than honorable conditions, it might depriv e him of virtually all veterans benefits based upon his current enlistment, and that he might expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life based on his discharge. Additionally, the Applicant would have stated he understood the elements of the offenses with which he was charged and would have admitted he was guilty of violating Article 86. The evidence of record does not demonstrate that the Applicant was not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions. 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 and Post-Service Conduct .

Pertinent Regulation/Law
A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 29, effective 11 July 2000 until 21 August 2002,
A rticle 1910-106, SEPARATION IN LIEU OF TRIAL BY COURT-MARTIAL.

B. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part IV, Para 403m(7)(b), Presumption Concerning Court-Martial Specifications .

 C . 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 .


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 | 2014_Navy | ND1400834

    Original file (ND1400834.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: DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000847

    Original file (ND1000847.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.Applicant seeks upgrade to reenlist in the U.S. Armed Forces.2. Regulations limit the NDRB’s review to a determination of the propriety and equity of the discharge.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries and administrative separation process, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801630

    Original file (ND0801630.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board determined based on the lack of documentation provided an upgrade would be inappropriate and the characterization of service received, “Under Other Than Honorable”, was an appropriate characterization considering the time served and the nature of the UCMJ violation involved.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found the discharge was proper and...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700890

    Original file (ND0700890.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board determined that the Applicant’s post service did not mitigate the misconduct which resulted in the Applicant’s discharge and characterization of his service. 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 Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USNR (DEP) 20010629 - 20010709Active: 19840306 - 19880304 Period of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1401761

    Original file (ND1401761.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 GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS) and the narrative reason for separation shall remain MISCONDUCT. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0601141

    Original file (ND0601141.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 85 (Desertion). 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. Additionally, the NDRB does not have the authority to change a...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00223

    Original file (ND02-00223.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00223 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020109, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions. January 16, 1990 military medical record (Enclosure 3) that states my auto accident and the many health problems I experienced and continue to experience as a result. People did not understand what was happening to me, and I was too nayve to know how to get the military to see...

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0500555

    Original file (MD0500555.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. 940523: Report of Return of Deserter. 940825: GCMCA, Commander, Marine Corps Base, Camp Lejeune, determined that Applicant had no potential for further service, that separation in lieu of trial by court-martial was in the best interest of the service, and directed discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of conduct triable by courts-martial.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801006

    Original file (ND0801006.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Based on the NAVPERS 1070/6l3 warning of5 April 2006, the Applicant was notified that assistance in correcting his performance deficiencies, namely his failure to pay his debts, was available from his chain of command and the Command Financial Specialist. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301038

    Original file (ND1301038.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 receive service benefits.2. ” 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...