Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000809
Original file (ND1000809.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-FC3, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20100201
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)        20050818 - 20060124     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20060125     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20080430      Highest Rank/Rate: FC2
Length of Service : Y ear ( s ) M onth ( s ) 06 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 96
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 2.4 ( 5 )      Behavior: 2.0 ( 5 )        OTA: 2.64

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):     

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP :

- 20080318 :       Article (Absence without leave)
         Article (Missing movement)
         Article 92 (Failure to obey a lawful order)
          Awarded : Susp ended:

S CM :    SPCM:    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 :        





Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 11, effective 26 April 2005 until 11 June 2008, 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 87 (Missing Movement) and Article 92 ( V iolation of order or regulation).



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

Applicant’s Issues

 1.       Nondecisional issues : The Applicant seeks a change in his reentry code to RE-1.

2.       Decisional issues : The Applicant contends that his discharge characterization of service warrants an upgrade from General (Under Honorable Conditions) to Honorable due to the fact that his command disregarded his emotional and mental status at the time and if allowed psychiatric counseling , he would still be a productive member of the Department of the Navy.

Decision

Date : 20 1 1 0331   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 NDRB 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 identified one decisional issue for the NDRB’s consideration; additionally, the NDRB completed a thorough review of the circumstances that led to the Applicant’s discharge, and the discharge process, to ensure the discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety.

The Applicant’s record of service reflects entry into the military without waiver to enlistment standards. He enlisted at age 2 1 as an E- 3 with a four-year contract and 24-month extension under a guarantee for the Fire Control Technician “A” school p rogram. The Applicant completed his training pipeline as a SPY-1 Radar technician and was further assigned to service aboard a DDG stationed in Yokosuka, Japan . The Applicant completed two years and three months of service of his enlistment contract; he was separated involuntarily prior to the end of his enlistment period due to Misconduct (Commission of a Serious Offense) as defined in Article 1910-142 of the Naval Military Personnel Manual (MILPERSMAN). During his enlistment period, the Applicant received no NAVPERS 1070/613 retention-counseling warnings of record but was subject to a nonjudicial punishment for violations of the following Articles of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ):

•         Article (Absence without leave)
•         Article (Missing movement)
•         Article 92 (Failure to obey a lawful order) .

In accordance with Article 1910-142 of the MILPERSMAN, the Applicant was processed for separation for Misconduct ( Commission of a Serious Offense ) . The Applicant was notified of administrative separation processing on 26 March 2008. On 15 April 2008, the local Separation Authority directed the Applicant ’ s discharge, finding that a preponderance of the evidence proved the misconduct and that separation was warranted. He further directed that the Applicant’s characterization of service at discharge be General (Under Honorable Conditions).

The Applicant ’ s official service record does not contain a complete copy of the administrative discharge package. In its absence, the NDRB presumed regularity of governmental affairs in that the Applicant’s command properly afforded him his rights in accordance with the MILPERSMAN regarding involuntary separation from the Service. Though the NDRB was unable to verify the Applicant’s election of rights due to the absence of a complete copy of the administrative separation package, the Applicant’s Form DD-214 ( B lock 26) documents a separation code of “HKQ.” This separation code indicates specifically that the Applicant was discharged for the commission of a serious offense and that he was afforded his right to an administrative discharge hearing board, but elected to waive that right.

Issue 1: (Non-Decisional). The Applicant seeks a change in his reentry code to RE-1 . The NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities. Furthermore, t he NDRB has no jurisdiction over reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Navy, Marine Corps, or any other of the Armed Forces and is prohibited from changing a reenlistment code. However, n either a less than fully honorable discharge, nor an unfavorable "RE" code is , in itself , a bar to reenlistment; a request for waiver of conditions may be submitted through a recruiter during the processing of a formal application for enlistment. Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records can make changes to reenlistment codes. The Applicant may petition the Board for Correction of Naval Records, 2 Navy Annex, Washington, DC 20370-5100, using DD Form 149 to address reenlistment code issues. As such, these issues do not serve to provide a foundation upon which the NDRB can grant relief.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends that his discharge characterization of service warrants an upgrade from General (Under Honorable Conditions) to Honorable due to the fact that his command disregarded his emotional and mental status at the time; if allowed psychiatric counseling , he would still be a productive member of the Department of the Navy.

The NDRB completed a thorough review of the circumstances that led to the Applicant’s discharge, and the discharge process, to ensure the discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety. In accordance with the MILPERSMAN, service members may be separated based on the commission of a serious military or civilian offense when the Commanding Officer believes the specific circumstances of the offense warrant separation and that the offense would warrant a punitive discharge if adjudicated at trial by court-martial . Violation of Article 8 7 ( M issing movement) and Article 9 2 ( Failure to obey an order or regulation) of the UCMJ warrant punitive discharge and confinement for up to 2 years if adjudicated at trial by special or general court-martial. Therefore, the requirement for consideration as a serious offense as a basis for separation , in accordance with the MILPERSMAN , was established by the command.

Moreover, d espite a servicemember’s prior record of service, certain serious offenses, even though isolated, warrant separation from the Naval Service in order to maintain proper order and discipline. In the Applicant’s case, the command did not pursue a punitive discharge , but instead , opted for the more lenient nonjudicial punishment and recommendation for administrative separation . The Separation Authority determined that a preponderance of the evidence documented that the Applicant committed misconduct and that processing for separation was warranted . As such, he directed that the Applicant be discharged and that a reenlistment code of RE-4 (not recommended for reenlistment) be assigned .

The Applicant contends his disciplinary problems were the result of stress caused by his f amily situation. The Applicant further contends that the characterization of his discharge be upgraded because he was suffer ing from emotional distress that could have be en resolved with psychiatric counseling. The NDRB recognizes that serving in the military is challenging. The Applicant’s record documents an attempted suicide followed by treatment in the emergency room with follow-up counseling and an evaluation by mental health care providers . After counseling by an appropriately credentialed mental health care provider, the Applicant may have been recommended for retention and treatment or separation , if he m et the requirements for processing by reason of Convenience of the Government (Personality Disorder) or by a physical or mental condition (not a disorder) . However, while being evaluated by mental healthcare providers, the Applicant willingly and knowingly en tered into an unauthorized absence status , miss ing his ship ’ s planned movement, and violat ing other l awful orders and regulations . In accordance with the MILPERSMAN, s eparation for Convenience of the Government due to a P ersonality D isorder or due to a physical or mental condition (not a disorder) is not appropriate when separation is warranted for any other reason (e.g., a service member meets minimum criteria for misconduct processing). Given the Applicant’s misconduct of record, he me t the minimum criteria for processing for Misconduct ( Commission of a Serious Offense ) .

An Honorable characterization of service is warranted when the quality of a member’s service generally meets the standard of acceptable conduct and performance for naval personnel, or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization of service would be clearly inappropriate. A General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge is warranted when the quality of the member’s service has been honest and faithful, but significant negative aspects of the member’s conduct or performance of duty outweighed the positive aspects of the member’s service record.

Based on a review of the evidence and the circumstances unique to this case, the NDRB determined that the Applicant’s misconduct properly satisfied the requirements established for separation based on M isconduct (Commission of a Serious Offense) as the basis for discharge. As such, the NDRB determined there was no impropriety due to an error of fact, law, procedure, or discretion with the discharge. Accordingly, relief based on propriety is denied; the narrative reason for discharge shall not change. In consideration of the Applicant’s record of service and the serious nature of his misconduct, the NDRB determined that the quality of the Applicant ’s service was generally honest and faithful, but that significant negative aspects of his conduct or performance of duty did outweigh the positive aspects of his service record. Accordingly, after a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the NDRB discerned no inequity in the characterization of the Applicant’s service at discharge. The NDRB determined that an upgrade would not be appropriate and that relief is not warranted; therefore, the character of the discharge shall not change.

 Summary : After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, medical and service record entries, and discharge process, the NDRB 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 .


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 | ND0800308

    Original file (ND0800308.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Types of Documents Submitted/reviewedRelated to Military Service: DD 214: Service and/or 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 Representation: From Member of Congress: Other Documentation (Describe) DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000719

    Original file (ND1000719.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends his discharge characterization is too harsh for the misconduct of record. When notified of the administrative separation process using the procedure, the Applicant waived rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and to request an administrative board.The Applicant provided documentation that included:, , ,post-service...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901262

    Original file (ND0901262.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1.Post-service conduct 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. A request for a waiver can be submitted during the processing of a formal application for reenlistment through a recruiter.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1401364

    Original file (ND1401364.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant contends that his discharge was improper because he did not have a pattern of misconduct as evident by his awards, recommendations for retention, and evaluations. The Applicant contends that his discharge was improper because he did not have a pattern of misconduct as evident by his awards, recommendations for retention, and evaluations. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1500890

    Original file (ND1500890.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/To Congress member: Pertinent Regulation/Law A. The evidence contained...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1401037

    Original file (ND1401037.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Therefore, the NDRB determined the Applicant’s discharge should be changed to General, and the narrative reason for discharge shall remain as issued. ” 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201261

    Original file (ND1201261.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 | 2010_Navy | ND1000678

    Original file (ND1000678.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 included for of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article (Absence without leave, UA 20070719 – 20070730), Article (Missing movement, missed sailing of USS Tarawa on 20070723), Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation, wrongfully having a personal relationship...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0701012

    Original file (ND0701012.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 did note administrative error(s) on the original DD Form 214: “ UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS” “MISCONDUCT ” The NDRB will recommend to the Commander, Navy Personnel Command, that the DD 214 be corrected as...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200998

    Original file (ND1200998.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. 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...