Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001057
Original file (ND1001057.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-AO3, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20100317
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)        19990528 - 19990614     Reserves : 19980623 - 19990528 USMCR
         Active : 19990615 - 20021219 USN
Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20021220     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20060922      Highest Rank/Rate: AO2
Length of Service : Y ear ( s ) 0 9 M onth ( s ) 03 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 54
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 3.8 ( 4 )      Behavior: 3.0 ( 4 )        OTA: 3.31 (4)

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle Pistol MC R R (2) CGUC

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP :

- 20060908 :       Article (Unauthorized absence)
         Awarded: RESTR (to E-4) Susp ended:

S CM :             SPCM:             C C :

Civil Arrests:   20051105: Suspected spous al abuse (case dropped CA Superior Court, 20060725)
         20060902: Suspected domestic battery (case status/determination NFIR)
Retention Warning Counseling :

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

The NDRB did note administrative error(s) on the original DD Form 214:
         Block 12c, Net Active Service This Period, should read: YEAR(S) 03, MONTH(S) 09, DAY(S) 03
         Block 12d, Total Prior Active Service, should read: YEAR(S) 03, MONTH(S) 06, DAY(S) 05
         “ CONTINUOUS HONORABLE ACTIVE SERVICE FROM 19990615 UNTIL 20021219 ”

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 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 128 .



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

Applicant’s Issues

 1.        Applicant contends his discharge was improper/inequitable based on post-discharge civilian court decision.

Decision

Date: 20 1 1 04 28             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 identif ied one decisional issue for the Board ’s consideration . T he Board complete d a thorough review of the circumstances that led to discharge and the discharge process to ensure discharge met the pertinent sta ndards of equity and propriety. The Applicant’s record of service did not contain any NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13) retention warnings, but did include for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 86 ( Absence without leave , 0730 on 5 Sep 2006 to 1500 on 6 Sep 2006 ) . The record did not contain evidence of trial by courts-martial, but did reflect two civil arrests for spousal abuse (5 Nov 2005) and domestic battery (2 Sep 2006). The records did not contain results of civil prosecution or court decision s . Based on the preponderance of the evidence that the Applicant committed the offense that resulted in civil arrest , command administratively processed for separation . When notified of administrative separation processing using the procedure on 12 Sep 2006 , the Applicant waived rights to consult with a qualified counsel and submit a written statement . The Applicant was separated from the Navy on 22 Sep 2006 with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge due to Misconduct (Serious Offense).

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his discharge was improper/inequitable based on post-discharge civilian court decision . The Applicant states in his letter to the NDRB that the civilian court(s) dropped the charges on him, which absolved him of the Nov 2005 and Sep 2006 spousal abuse and domestic battery arrest/charges for which he was separated. Despite a service member’s prior record of service, certain serious offenses warrant separation from the naval service in order to maintain proper order and discipline. Since an administrative discharge is not punishment, the decision to administratively discharge a service member is made independently of and does not require adjudication at civil trial, military court-martial , or nonjudicial punishment (NJP) . A preponderance of the evidence that a crime was committed is all that is required. In the 16 Feb 2006 Family Advocacy Program (FAP) Case Review Committee (CRC) Determination Report to the C ommanding O fficer, the case manager states that the Applicant and his wife had not benefitted from participation in the FAP (the Applicant attended 25 counseling sessions but was often a “no show ” ; his wife was completely unresponsive to Family Advocacy services, substance abuse , or psychiatric services ), that they remain at risk for further domestic violence ( with likelihood of future abuse and severity of abuse between the two considered moderately high) , that further treatment was not indicated, and that the Applicant was considered a FAP treatment failure and not amenable to significant change through available services. With two civil arrest reports and the Family Advocacy determination of FAP treatment failure, the command chose to administratively separate the Applicant on the basis of M isconduct - C ommission of a S erious O ffense. He was discharged from the Navy on 22 Sep 2006 with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge.

The characterization of service is a description of the total service provided during the member’s enlistment. When the service of a member of the Naval Service has been honest and faithful, it is appropriate to characterize that service as H onorable. A General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge is warranted when significant negative aspects of a member’s conduct or performance of duty outweigh the positive aspects of the member’s military record. The Applicant’s service included on e NJP for a two-day unauthorized absence (UA) violation of the UCMJ and two civil arrests for spousal abuse (Nov 2005) and domestic battery (Sep 2006) , which are a violation of UCMJ Article 128 and constitute the commission of a serious offense per the UCMJ . This specific violation is punishable by a Bad Conduct D ischarge and up to six months imprisonment if adjudicated by punitive c ourts- m artial (Special or General) . The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the

character of service, reflects the Applicant’s willful failure to meet the requirements of conduct expected of all Sailors , especially considering his grade and length of service , and falls short of what is required for an upgrade in the characterization of service. Relief denied.

Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s s ummary of s ervice, r ecord e ntries and the 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 | 2011_Navy | ND1100343

    Original file (ND1100343.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Based on the offense committed by the Applicant, his command administratively processed him for separation.After initial notification of administrative separation processing (for commission of a serious offense and family advocacy rehabilitation failure) using the procedure on 15 Jun 2009, the Applicant elected to exercise his rights to consult with a qualified counsel and request an administrative separation board. After review of all the available evidence, the ASB found the following:...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1500373

    Original file (ND1500373.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 (SERIOUS OFFENSE). ” Additional Reviews : After a...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800380

    Original file (ND0800380.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Court day scheduled 20031103CC:Retention Warnings:NONE Types of Documents SubmittedRelated 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000405

    Original file (ND1000405.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)20020531 - 20021111Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20021112Age at Enlistment:Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20060908Highest Rank/Rate:MA3Length of Service: Year(s)Month(s)27 Day(s)Education Level:AFQT: 52EvaluationMarks:Performance:3.5(4)Behavior:2.7(4)OTA: 3.14Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):Pistol...

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0501226

    Original file (MD0501226.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION Issues, as stated Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application and/or from an attached document/letter to the Board:“Application for correction of military record under the provisions of title 10, U. S. code, section 1552 (5, 6) Application for the review of discharge from the Armed Forces of the Unites States (6):I, R_ E_ K_(Applicant), would like to request that my discharge determination of Other than Honorable be changed to a Medical...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801097

    Original file (ND0801097.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    [Extracted from CO, TRIDENT Refit Facility letter 20050624].NJP:SCM:SPCM:CC:Retention Warning Counseling:NDRB Documentary Review Conducted (date): 20070510 NDRB Documentary Review Docket Number: ND06-00888 NDRB Documentary Review Findings: NO CHANGE WARRANTED 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101017

    Original file (ND1101017.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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0902026

    Original file (MD0902026.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. 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 previous in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member’s overall character.Summary: After a thorough...

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-01205

    Original file (MD02-01205.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD02-01205 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020823, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable and the reason for the discharge be changed. The Board will determine which reason for discharge should have been assigned based upon the facts and circumstances before the Board, including the service regulations governing the reasons for discharge at that time, to determine whether relief is warranted. Applicant was...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00199

    Original file (ND00-00199.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant attended an alcohol abuse education program, then he and his wife received marriage counseling at the Navy Family Service Center from April through August 1986. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper and equitable (C and D).In the applicant’s issue 1, the Board determined this issue is without merit. In regards to the employment and changed life issues: the Board...