Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001772
Original file (ND1001772.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-MCSA, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20100707
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)        20040303 - 20040811     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20040812     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20060803      Highest Rank/Rate: MCSN
Length of Service : Y ear ( s ) M onth ( s ) 19 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 69
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 1. 6 ( 3 )      Behavior: 1. 3 ( 3 )        OTA: 1. 8 3

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):     

Period of C ONF :

NJP :

- 20050209 :       Article (Failure to obey order or regulation)
         Awarded : Susp ended:

- 20060307 :       Article (Unauthorized absence , 2 specifications )
         Specification 1: 0600-06 3 5, 20060217
         Specification 2: 0720, 20060217 to 1115, 20060220, 4 days
         Awarded : Susp ended:

- 20060622 :       Article (Failure to obey order issued by an E-8 by wrongfully showing up for muster 28 minutes late in an improper uniform)
         Awarded : RIR (to E-2) Susp ended:

S CM :             SPCM:    C C :

Retention Warning Counseling :

- 20050209 :      For NJP awarded on 20050209 for violation of UCMJ, Article 92, F ailure to obey an order or regulation.

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

The NDRB did note administrative error(s) on the original DD Form 214:

 “ MILPERSMAN 1910-140 ”
“ 050429-050502 ”

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), re-issued October 2002, effective 22 August 2002 until 25 April 2005, Article 1910-140, SEPARATION BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT - 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 reenlist in the U.S. Armed Forces.
2.       Applicant contends his discharge was inequitable due to youth and immaturity.

Decision

Date: 20 1 1 08 11             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 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 . The Board complete d 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 NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13) retention warning (9 Feb 2005) and for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 86 (Unauthorized absence, 2 specifications: 0600-0635, 17 Feb 2006; 0720, 17 Feb 2006 ; and 1115, 20 Feb 2006) and Article 92 ( Failure to obey order or regulation, 2 specifications: Feb 2005; Jun 2006, failed to muster on time and in the appropriate uniform per the orders of a Senior Chief Petty Officer ) . Based on the offenses committed by the Applicant, command administratively processed for separation. When notified of administrative separation processing using the procedure on 23 Jun 2006 , the Applicant waived rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request an administrative separation board. On 3 Jul 2006, the Separation Authority directed the Applicant be s eparated from the Navy with an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge due to Pattern of Misconduct. The Applicant was subsequently administratively discharged from the Navy on 3 Aug 2006.

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant seeks an upgrade to reenlist in the U.S. Armed Forces. 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 B oard 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 was inequitable due to youth and immaturity. While he may feel this was the underlying cause or mitigates his misconduct, the record clearly reflects the Applicant’s conduct was willful and demonstrated he was unfit for further service. The NDRB determined that the Applicant ’ s youth or age was not a mitigating factor in his misconduct . The NDRB recognizes that serving in the U.S. Navy is challenging. However, a ll members are expected to uphold the high standards of conduct as evidenced in our Core Values of Honor, Courage, and Commitment, regardless of the environment or mission. An U nder O ther T han H onorable C onditions discharge is warranted when a member engages in conduct involving one or more acts or omissions that constitute a significant departure from the conduct expected of members of the N aval S ervice. The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of service, reflects he failed to meet the requirements of conduct expected of all Sailors, regardless of grade or length of service , and falls short of what is required for an upgrade . 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 15 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

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1002311

    Original file (MD1002311.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant properly and equitably received a General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization of service for his active-duty service from August 2002 to August 2006 as explained above.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries and the completion of required active service separation process, the Board found the discharge was proper and equitable. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001126

    Original file (ND1001126.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 one of his length of service, and falls short of what is required for an upgrade.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries and the administrative separation process, the Board found Therefore, the awarded...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0902438

    Original file (MD0902438.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Violation of Article 92 x 3 by disobeying the liberty order and riding in a government vehicle in an off duty status. ” 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 opportunities.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301579

    Original file (ND1301579.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. Relief denied.Summary: After...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700679

    Original file (ND0700679.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 Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USNR (DEP)20030322 - 20031107Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20031108Years Contracted:; Extension: Date of Discharge:20050209Length of Service: 01 Yrs 03Mths02 DysLost Time:Days UA: 17 Days Confined: Education...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900107

    Original file (ND0900107.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 Representation:From Congress member: Other Documentation: DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL...

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0601001

    Original file (MD0601001.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.20050419: NAVDRUGLAB, Jacksonville, FL, reported Applicant’s urine sample, received 20050414, tested positive for THC.20050422: NJP for violation(s) of UCMJ: Article 112a: On or about 20050309 - 20050409, knowingly and wrongfully used marijuana Award: Forfeiture of $617 for 2 months, restriction for 60 days. Elements of Discharge: [INVOLUNTARY] Discharge...

  • USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201604

    Original file (MD1201604.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. Therefore, the characterization of service will change from Uncharacterized to General (Under Honorable Conditions).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 the discharge was proper but the characterization of service was improperly assigned. ” Additional...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201146

    Original file (ND1201146.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. The Applicant was...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1002338

    Original file (ND1002338.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...