Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1002196
Original file (ND1002196.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-CTT2, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20100908
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)        19960409 - 1996052 0     Active:   1996052 1 - 20010712 HON
                                    USN 20010713 - 20060803 HON

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20060804     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20070914      Highest Rank/Rate: CTT1
Length of Service : Y ear ( s ) M onth ( s ) 10 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 87
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 3.0 ( 2 )      Behavior: 1.5 ( 2 )        OTA: 2.78

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle Pistol (2) (2) (2) KCM SSDR (2) ESWS FLoC (2) GWOTSM NRSR

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP :

- 20061205 :       Article (Violate a lawful general regulation, enter into inappropriate relationship with a Navy applicant, M_ R_)
         Article ( Did use applicant M_ R_’s social security number to wrongfully appropriate Navy uniforms of a value of approximately $300.00)
         Article 134 ( Make and utter to M_ R_ a certain check, for the purpose of obtaining cash, fail to maintain sufficient funds in the bank for payment upon presentment for payment)
         Awarded : Susp ended:

S CM :    SPCM:    C C :      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 18, “ CONTINUOUS HONORABLE ACTIVE SERVICE FROM 96052 1 UNTIL 060803 ”
        
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 s 91, 121, and 134.



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

Applicant’s Issues

 1.        The Applicant contends an administrative board voted to retain him, and he should not have been separated.

Decision

Date : 2011 1117             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’s record of service included for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article ( Having an inappropriate relationship with a Navy applicant , ), Article ( , 1 specification ), and Article ( Article , 1 specification : writing checks with insufficient funds ). Based on the offenses committed by the Applicant, command administratively processed for separation. When notified of administrative separation processing using the procedure, the Applicant rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request an A dministrative Separation Board (ASB) . The ASB found that a preponderance of the evidence supported the commission of a serious offense. The ASB also voted 3-0 to recommend separat ion with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization but voted
 3-0 to recommend suspen sion of the separation for 12 months. The S eparation A uthority (Commander, Navy Personnel Command) decided to not suspend the separation and ordered the Applicant be separated with a General (Under Honorable Conditions ) characterization of service.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends an ASB voted to retain him, and he should not have been separated. The record shows the ASB found that a preponderance of the evidence supported the commission of a serious offense. The ASB also voted 3-0 to recommend separation with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization but voted 3-0 to recommend suspension of the separation for 12 months. Per the Naval Military Personnel Manual (MILPERSMAN) , an ASB only recommends a characterization of service and whether or not the Applicant should be retained or separated. These recommendations are not binding on the Separation Authority (in the Applicant’s case, the Separation Authority was Commander, Navy Personnel Command). The Separation Authority is the final authority on whether or not the Applicant is retained in service. The Applicant’s commanding officer forwarded the ASB results and recommendations to Navy Personnel Command with a recommendation to separate the Applicant with an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions characterization of service. Commander, Navy Personnel Command replied that while he concurred with the Under Other Than Honorable Conditions recommendation, he was bound by the MILPERSMAN and could not assign a characterization of service “less favorable to the respondent” than one rendered by the ASB. He did not accept the ASB’s recommendation to suspend the separation and directed that the Applicant be separated with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization of service as recommended by the ASB. This action by the S eparation A uthority was well within the purview of his authority. The NDRB carefully considered the entire record and found no evidence of impropriety or inequity in the Applicant’s separation process. Considering the serious nature of his misconduct, the NDRB determined the Applicant is extremely fortunate to hav e received a General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization of service. An upgrade would be inappropria te. 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 d ischarge 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, specifically the paragraphs titled Additional Reviews, Automatic Upgrades, 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

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1100304

    Original file (MD1100304.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 .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 eligible for a...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101290

    Original file (ND1101290.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 UNSATPARTICIPATION IN READY RESERVE.The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance...

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1001358

    Original file (MD1001358.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 . ” 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1300250

    Original file (MD1300250.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Based on the Applicant’s record of service, which included below-average Conduct marks, three retention warnings, and three NJPs, the NDRB determined the Applicant warranted an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions characterization, however, the NDRB is not authorized to change a discharge characterization of service to a more unfavorable level. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301031

    Original file (ND1301031.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, medical and 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 is not eligible for further reviews from the NDRB. ”...

  • USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201583

    Original file (MD1201583.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    When notified of administrative separation processing using the procedure, the Applicant rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request an administrative board. The Applicant could have provided documentation as detailed in the Post-Service Conduct paragraph in the Addendum , however, completion of these items alone does not guarantee an upgrade from an unfavorable discharge as each discharge is reviewed by the Board on a case by case basis to determine...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200267

    Original file (ND1200267.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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201185

    Original file (ND1201185.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB conducted a thorough review of the Applicant’s DD Form 293 and the documentation he submitted in support of his contentions, his service record, the ASB proceedings, letter of deficiency, and Separation Authority’s decision and determined there was no impropriety or inequity in the Applicant’s discharge process, his characterization of service, or the Narrative Reason for Separation. Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101669

    Original file (ND1101669.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Based on the offense committed by the Applicant, command administratively processed for separation. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000923

    Original file (ND1000923.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.Naval Military Personnel...