Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000592
Original file (ND1000592.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-FA, USNR

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20091214
Characterization of Service Received:
Narrative Reason for Discharge:
Authority for Discharge: MILPERSMAN 3630650 IN LIEU OF TRIAL BY COURT MARTIAL

Applicant’s Request:      Characterization change to:      
         Narrative Reason change to:      

Summary of Service

Prior Service:

Inactive:         NONE              Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 1996 0 430     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 19971031      Highest Rank/Rate: FN
Length of Service :
Inactive:
Y ear( s ) M onth( s ) 21 D a y ( s )
Active:
Y ear ( s ) M onth ( s ) 27 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 42
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: NFIR         Behavior: NFIR   OTA: NFIR

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle

Periods of UA /CONF: 19970324-19970708 (123 days) / NONE

NJP :

S CM :

SPCM: Charges were preferred for violation of Art icle 86 (Unauthorized absence). The Applicant requested to be separated in lieu of trial by court-martial. The command and separating authority approved the Applicant’s request and discharged him 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 seeks an upgrade to enhance employment opportunities .
2 . The Applicant seeks a change in his RE-code in order to reenlist into the Armed Forces.
3 . The Applicant contends his discharge is inequitable because his misconduct was due to his youth and immaturity.
4 . The Applicant believes his post-service conduct is worthy of consideration.

Decision

Date: 20110317 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 c harges being preferred for violation o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 86 (Unauthorized absence for 123 days ). T he Applicant requested separation in lieu of a trial by court-martial and his request was accepted. W hen requesting separation in lieu of trial by court-martial, the member admits his guilt and acknowledges his understanding that if his discharge is Under Other Than Honorable Conditions, it may deprive him of virtually all veterans' benefits based upon his current period of active service, and that he may expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life in situations where the type of service rendered in any branch of the Armed Forces or the character of discharge received m ay have a bearing. The command and separating authority approved the Applicant’s request and discharged him accordingly. The NDRB did not have the Applicant’s administrative separation package , but presumes the actions of the Navy , in all aspects of conduct, were proper and warranted.

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant seeks an upgrade to enhance employment opportunities and a change in his RE-code in order to reenlist into the Armed Forces. 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. Also, 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 discharge is inequitable , because his misconduct was due to his youth and immaturity. The NDRB determined that the Applicant's youth or age was not a mitigating factor in his misconduct. The NDRB recognizes serving in the U.S. Navy is challenging. However, most members of the Navy serve honorably and therefore earn their honorable discharges. In fairness to those members of the Navy, commanders and separation authorities are tasked to ensure undeserving Sailors receive no higher characterization than is due. 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. The Applicant’s discharge characterization accurately reflects his service. Relief denied.

4 : (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant believes his post-service conduct is worthy of consideration. Although the Applicant provid ed several character references and certificates of training from a law enforcement course and states that he has matured and wants a second chance , he failed to provide any additional documentary evidence on his behalf for post-service consideration. To warrant an upgrade , the Applicant’s post - service efforts need to be more encompassing. The Applicant could have produced evidence as stated in the Post-Service Conduct paragraph in the A ddendum with the full understanding completion of these items alone does not guarantee an upgrade. Without post-service documentary evidence, the Board determined the awarded characterization of service shall remain Under Other Than Honorable Conditions. Relief denied.

Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, medical and 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 , Employment/Educational Opportunities and Post-Service Conduct .

Pertinent Regulation/Law

A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 14, effective 3 October 1996 until
11 December 1997, Article 3630650, PROCEDURES FOR PROCESSING ENLISTED PERSONNEL FOR 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 | 2010_Navy | ND1000867

    Original file (ND1000867.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0902530

    Original file (ND0902530.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 was deficient of a discharge package that would have specifically indentified the violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice committed by him.Based on his misconduct, the Applicant chose to separate in lieu of trial by court-martial. Without post-service documentary...

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1000997

    Original file (MD1000997.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 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101255

    Original file (ND1101255.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant wants his discharge upgraded so he can reenlist in the military. Neither a less than fully honorable discharge nor an unfavorable RE code is, in itself, a bar to reenlistment. ” 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.

  • USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1401567

    Original file (MD1401567.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. 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 OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS and the narrative reason for separation shall remain MISCONDUCT. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000045

    Original file (ND1000045.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Additionally, the NDRB is not authorized to change a reenlistment code. 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 . ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing,...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901727

    Original file (MD0901727.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Also, 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. A request for a waiver can be submitted during the processing of a formal application for reenlistment through a recruiterSummary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, medical and service record entries, discharge process and...

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1100569

    Original file (MD1100569.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities. The NDRB determined that changing the characterization of service would be against regulations. ” 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 | ND0902249

    Original file (ND0902249.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: Substance Abuse: Criminal Records: Family/Personal Status: Community Service: References: Additional Statements: From Applicant: From/To Representation:From/ToCongress member: Other Documentation: Pertinent Regulation/Law A. The Board determined an upgrade would be...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001014

    Original file (ND1001014.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. 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...