Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000895
Original file (ND1000895.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-SR, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20100217
Characterization of Service Received:
Narrative Reason for Discharge:
Authority for Discharge: MILPERSMAN 3630300 [PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT]

 Applicant’s Request:      Characterization change to:      
         Narrative Reason change to:       EARLY OUT (Other)

Summary of Service
Prior Service:
Inactive:         US N R (DEP)        1995071 7 - 1995 0725     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 19950 726     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 19970207      Highest Rank/Rate: SA
Length of Service : Y ear ( s ) M onth ( s ) 0 3 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 34
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 3.0 ( 1 )      Behavior: 2.0 ( 1 )        OTA: 2.67

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):     

Period of UA: 19960102-19960112, 10 days. C ONF :

NJP :
- 19960202 :       Article (Unauthorized absence)
         Awarded : Susp ended:

- 19960829 :       Article (Absent from unit, organization or place of duty) , 2 specifications
         Article 86 (Abandon watch)
          Article 86 (Failure to go to appointed place of duty)
         Awarded : Susp ended:

- 19970109 :       Article (Absent from unit, organization or place of duty) , 2 specifications
         Article 92 (Failure to obey a lawful order), 2 specifications
         Awarded : Susp ended:

S CM :    SPCM:    C C :

Retention Warning Counseling :
- 19960829 :       For violation of article 86 (Unauthorized absence) .

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

The NDRB did note administrative error(s) on the original DD Form 214:
         Block 12a, Date Entered AD This Period, should read: “95 JUL 26 ”
         Block 12c, Net Active Service This Period, should read: “01 06 03 ”
         “ PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT ”
         “ 19960102-19960112 (10) ”
        
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:           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 14, effective 3 October 1996 until
11 December 1997, Article 3630600, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT - A 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 seeks an upgrade to obtain VA benefit eligibility.
2.       Applicant seeks an upgrade to improve employment opportunities.

Decision

Date : 20 1 1 03 31             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 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 Applicant did not identify any decisional issues for the Board ’s consideration . However, 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 proprie ty. The Applicant’s record of service included NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13) retention warning for unauthorized absence (29 Aug 1996) and for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 86 ( Absence without leave, 7 specifications: absence from unit from 2-12 Jan 1996, 10 days; absence from place of duty on 5 separate occasions, specifics NFIR; absence from watch, specifics NFIR) and Article 92 ( Failure to obey order, 2 specifications, specifics NFIR). Based on the repeated offenses committed by the Applicant, command administratively processed for separation. When notified of administrative separation processing using the procedure on 10 Jan 1997 , the Applicant waived rights to submit a written statement and request a General Court-Martial Convening Authority review. The Board could not determine whether the Applicant exercised or waived his right to consult with a qualified counsel. On 22 Jan 1997, the Applicant’s Commanding Officer recommended to the Commander, Navy Personnel Command that the Applicant be discharged for Pattern of Misconduct stating the Applicant “has been an administrative burden since reporting aboard. He has willfully and illegally violated the UCMJ while a member of the Naval service. His chain of command has repeatedly counseled him about his behavior to no avail. He has no potential for future service in the U.S. Navy . ” The Applicant was subsequently discharged from the Navy on 7 Feb 1997 with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge for Pattern of Misconduct.

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant seeks an upgrade to obtain VA benefit eligibility. 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.
: (Nondecisional) The Applicant seeks an upgrade to improve employment 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 .

Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s s ummary of s ervice, r ecord e ntries and administrative separation 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 for additional information.


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 | ND1400054

    Original file (ND1400054.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: Pertinent Regulation/Law A. DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001200

    Original file (ND1001200.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 09 July 1997, the Separation Authority directed the Applicant be discharged for the reason as stated and that he receive an RE-4 re-enlistment code - not recommended for re-enlistment. Based on a review of the evidence of record and circumstances unique to this case, the NDRB determined that the Applicant’s misconduct did properly satisfy the requirements established by the MILPERSMAN for separation based on the commission of a serious offense, a pattern of misconduct, and drug abuse. ”...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900443

    Original file (ND0900443.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation to help support a post-service conduct upgrade includes, but is not limited to: a verifiable continuous employment record; marriage and children’s birth certificate (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 or completion of higher...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201962

    Original file (ND1201962.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 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200501

    Original file (ND1200501.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    NDRB Issue: Change warranted to characterization of service on the basis of the Enlisted Performance Evaluation System. During the NDRB’s review of the Applicant’s record of service, the NDRB identified an inequity in the Applicant’s characterization of service and determined that the Applicant warrants an upgrade on the basis of the Enlisted Performance Evaluation System. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1400124

    Original file (ND1400124.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant seeks to improve his employment opportunities.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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1101170

    Original file (MD1101170.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. 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 .Since 15 years have elapsed since the date of his discharge, the Applicant is not eligible for a...

  • USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1401000

    Original file (MD1401000.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. 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 .Since 15 years have elapsed since the date of his discharge, the Applicant is not eligible...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700230

    Original file (ND0700230.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board found that Discussion Issue1: 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. Certain serious offenses, even though isolated, warrant separation from the Naval service in order to maintain proper order and discipline.The Applicant’s service was marred one retention warning, three nonjuducial punishments (NJP) for a violation of UCMJ Article 86 (Unauthorized...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900242

    Original file (ND0900242.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Service benefits.4. ” 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. 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.