Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1002297
Original file (ND1002297.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-PS3, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20100923
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)        20000623 - 20000628     Active:   20000629 - 20030604 HON

Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Current Enlistment: 20030605     Age at Enlistment: 21
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20060224      Highest Rank/Rate: AT3
Length of Service : Y ear s M onth s 20 D a ys
Education Level:        AFQT: 57
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 3.0 ( 2 )      Behavior: 3.0 ( 2 )        OTA: 3.09

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle EX Pistol EX NDSM SSDR (2) GCM NAVY “ E ” (2) GWOTSM G WOTEM AFEM
Periods of UA /C ONF :

SCM: NONE        SPCM: NONE       CC: NONE

NJP : 2
- 20040513 :      Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation, 2 specifications )
         Specification 1: Failed to make payments to Bank of America and Navy Exchange as outlined in P age 13 re payment schedule
         Specification 2: Violation of no shave chit guidelines
         Awarded: RIR RESTR Suspended: RIR

- 20051202 :      Article 107 (False official statement )
         Article 121 (Larceny , f or stealing U.S. currency in the form of BAH in the amount of $3,368.00)
         Article 132 (Frauds against the United States , f or filing a claim for approval or repayment in the amount of $6,943.55 , which claim was false and fraudulent in the amount of $3,405.50)
         Awarded: RIR FOP RESTR EPD Suspended: RIR

Retention Warning Counseling: 2
- 20040323 :      For writing multiple checks to creditors without having sufficient funds

- 20040504 :      For violating a no shave chit guideline and a previously issued P age 13

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

The NDRB note d an administrative error on the original DD Form 214:

          “CONTINUOUS HONORABLE ACTIVE SERVICE FROM 20000629 UNTIL 20030604 ”
         
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:                  Other Documentation:    
                  Additional Statements:
         From Applicant:           From/To Representation:           From/To Congress member:        

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 92, 107, 121, and 132.



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

Applicant’s Issues

 1.       The Applicant seeks an upgrade to reenlist in the military .
2.       The Applicant seeks an upgrade for employment opportunities.
 3.       The Applicant contends that punishment for the offenses was already served before discharge was recommended .

Decision

Date: 20 1 2 01 19             Location: Washington D.C .        R epresentation : NONE

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’s record of service included two NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13) warnings and two non - judicial punishments (NJP s ) for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation, 2 specifications), Article 107 (False official statement , 1 specification ), Article 121 (Larceny, 1 specification) , and Article 132 (Frauds against the United States, 1 specification). Based on the offenses committed by the Applicant, his command administratively processed him for separation . When notified of administrative separation processing, the Applicant waived his rights to consult with a qualified counsel and submit a written statement .

: (Non - decisional) The Applicant seeks an upgrade to reenlist in the military. The NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities. Neither a less than fully honorable discharge nor an unfavorable Reentry (RE) code is, in itself, a bar to reenlistment. A request for a waiver can be submitted during the processing of a formal application for reenlistment through a recruiter. Additionally, the NDRB has no jurisdiction over reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Navy, Marine Corps, or any other of the Armed Forces and is not authorized to change an RE code. Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records can make changes to RE codes.

: (Non - decisional) The Applicant seeks an upgrade for employment opportunities . The NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment opportunities. Regulations limit the NDRB’s review to a determination of the propriety and equity of the discharge.

: ( D ecisional) (Propriety/Equity) RELIEF NOT WARRANTED. The Applicant contends that punishment for the offenses was already served before discharge was recommended. According to Navy regulations, t he imposition of NJP does not prohibit a commander from later deciding to administratively process a service member for separation after the punishment awarded at NJP has been served . The Applicant violated Articles 92, 107, 121, and 132 of the UCMJ, all of which are considered serious offense s . Regardless of whether a serious offense has been adjudicated through NJP or court-martial , c ertain serious offenses warrant separation from the Navy to maintain proper order and discipline. Making false official statements, larceny, and committing frauds against the United States usually result s in an unfavorable characterization of discharge or, at a maximum, a punitive discharge and possible confinement if adjudicated and awarded as part of a sentence by a special or general court-martial. The Applicant’s separation following NJP for the commission of multiple serious offenses is equitable and consistent with actions taken against other service members who commit ted the same misconduct . 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 remain GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS) and the narrative reason for separation shall remain MISCONDUCT (SERIOUS OFFENSE) . The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing for a period of fifteen years from the date of his 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 | 2009_Marine | MD0900326

    Original file (MD0900326.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB is not authorized to consider the Applicant’s upgrade request based on this Issue.The Applicant was referred to a SPCM and the NDRB determined the awarded discharge was appropriate and an upgrade would be inappropriate. The record shows the command acted within regulations and the specifics of the Applicant’s plea agreement; an upgrade would be inappropriate.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record, Discharge Process...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500598

    Original file (ND0500598.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. NDRB is not authorized to change a reenlistment code. The Veterans Administration determines eligibility for post-service benefits not the Naval Discharge Review Board.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700225

    Original file (ND0700225.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change: Applicant’s Issues:1. Issue 2 ():In the Applicant’s letter to the Board he states that his discharge does not properly represent his character of service. ” 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.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1002120

    Original file (ND1002120.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 | 2011_Navy | ND1100443

    Original file (ND1100443.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. ” 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.

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1100724

    Original file (MD1100724.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. Paragraph 6210,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301410

    Original file (ND1301410.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant contends her discharge was too harsh.The NDRB reviews the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge individually, on a case-by-case basis. Issue 4: (Decisional) (Propriety/Equity) RELIEF NOT WARRANTED. ” 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.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0701247

    Original file (ND0701247.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ” 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 a former member has been discharged for more than 15 years, has already been granted a personal appearance hearing or has otherwise exhausted his opportunities before the NDRB, the Applicant may petition the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR), 2 Navy Annex, Washington,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900968

    Original file (ND0900968.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. 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 from the date of discharge. If a former member has been discharged...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201904

    Original file (ND1201904.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to:SECRETARIAL AUTHORITY Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)19951130 - 19951226Active: 19951227 - 19990626 HON USN 19990627 - 20040923 HON Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20040924Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20061109Highest Rank/Rate: AO1Length of Service: Year(s) Month(s) 16 Day(s)Education Level:AFQT:...