Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100040
Original file (ND1100040.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
ex-SA, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20101005
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)        20060325 - 20060913     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20060914     Age at Enlistment: 18
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20080625      Highest Rank/Rate: S N
Length of Service : Y ear M onth s 12 D a ys
Education Level:        AFQT: 76
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 3.0 ( 1 )      Behavior: 3.0 ( 1 )        OTA: 3.00

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): None        

Periods of U nauthorized Absence (UA) : 20071023 - 20 071101 (10 days ), 20071212 - 20080613 (185 days )

NJP : NONE        S CM : NONE       SPCM: NONE       C C : NONE         Retention Warning Counseling : NONE

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

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

          Block 13, Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, should read “National Defense Service Medal”
“ 20071023 - 20071101 (10), 20071212 - 20080613(185) ”
        
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 31 May 2005 until Present, Article 1910-106, SEPARATION IN LIEU OF TRIAL BY COURT-MARTIAL.

B. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part IV, Para 403m(7)(b), Presumption Concerning Court-Martial Specifications .
C . 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

 Nondecisional Issues: The Applicant seeks a change in his reenlistment code (RE-Code) in order to facilitate reenlistment or commission in the A rmed F orces .
Decisional Issues: The Applicant seeks an upgrade in the characterization of his service at discharge to General ( U nder Honorable Conditions), contending that his discharge was inequitable in light of his youth and immaturity and the overall character of his service. Additionally, the Applicant contends that his post-service conduct is worthy of consideration.

Decision

Date : 20120112            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 NDRB presumes regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant. The Applicant indentified one decisional issue for the NDRB’s consideration (equity of the discharge characterization); additionally, the NDRB conducted a thorough review of the circumstances that led to the Applicant’s discharge, and the discharge process, to ensure the discharge met the pertinent standards of both equity and propriety.

The Applicant’s enlistment record reflects entry into military service at age 18, without any waivers to enlistment or induction standards. The Applicant enlisted on a 4 - year contract with a 24-month extension with a guarantee of training as a n IT specialist. The Applicant’s record of service included no NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13) retention-counseling warnings and no judicial or non-judicial proceedings during his current enlistment. However, the record of service documents a period of unauthorized absence from 23 October to 01 November 2007 (10 days) and 12 December 2007 to 13 June 2008 (185 days), both periods of unauthorized absence terminated by the Applicant’s surrender to military custody. The Applicant’s military service record contains a copy of the separation proceedings. In order to warrant separation in lieu of trial by court - martial, the Applicant must request separation - in writing - for the good of the service in order to escape charges that have been preferred against the Applicant and referred to trial by a Special Court-Martial or above. This request for separation must contain certain basic requirements - which must be satisfied - before receiving approval by the Separation Authority. In the Applicant’s request, he clearly affirmed that his rights were explained to him - thoroughly - to include his right to consult with qualified counsel. Furthermore, the Applicant admitted his guilt to the charges, as preferred against him, and further certified that he ha d a complete understanding of the negative consequences of his actions, the narrative reason for his separation, and the likely characterization of service upon separation - Under Other Than Honorable Conditions. The respondent also acknowledged that, if discharged with an OTH, it may deprive him of virtually all v eterans ’ benefits and that he might expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life in situations wherein the type of service rendered, or the character of discharge received, may have a bearing.

 (Non-Decisional Issue) The Applicant seeks a change in his characterization of service to General (Under Honorable Conditions) and a change to his reenlistment code (RE-Code) in order to facilitate re-enlistment or commission in the A rmed F orces . The NDRB has no jurisdiction over reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Navy, Marine Corps, or any other of the A rmed F orces, and is not authorized to change a reentry code. Additionally, there is no requirement, or law, that grants re-characterization solely on the issue of facilitating employment opportunities or enhancing educational opportunities or access to Veterans Affairs benefits. Regulations limit the NDRB’s review solely to a determination of the propriety and the equity of a discharge. As such, this issue does not serve to provide a foundation upon whi ch the Board can grant relief. The NDRB is not authorized to change the reentry code as requested. The Applicant can petition the Board for Correction of Naval Records using DD Form 149. When requesting a change, the Applicant should provide as much documentation regarding the justification for change as possible. The web address is http://www.donhq.navy.mil/bcnr/bcnr.htm .

(Decisional Issues) ( ) . The Applicant contend s that his discharge was inequitable in light of his youth and immaturity and the overall character of his service. Additionally, the Applicant contends that his post-service conduct is worthy of consideration. In reviewing discharges, the NDRB presumes regularity in the conduct of Government affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant. The NDRB reviews the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge individually, on a case-by-case basis. If such a review reveals an impropriety or inequity, relief is in order. Regulations permit relief on equitable grounds if the Applicant’s discharge is inconsistent with standards of discipline of the Naval Service. The NDRB reviewed all of the available records, supporting documents, facts, elements of discharge, evidence submitted by the Applicant, and circumstances unique to this case.

Propriety - The Applicant absented himself from his unit - twice - without authority and remained so absent until surrendering himself to military authority . The Applicant requested administrative separation for the good of the service in order to avoid the punitive effects of a trial by S pecial C ourt -M artial. The command accepted the Applicant’s request; as such, the Applicant was separated properly from the Service in accordance with chapter 1910-106 and 1910-230 of the Naval Military Personnel Manual (MILPERSMAN). Accordingly, relief based on propriety is not warranted.

 Equity - The NDRB recognizes that many of our service members are young at the time they enlist for service, however, most manage to serve their enlistment s honorably. While some members may be less mature than others, the NDRB does not view a member’s youth or immaturity to be a mitigating factor or a sufficient reason for misconduct, especially deliberate misconduct of the nature specified. Moreover, despite a servicemember’s prior record of service, certain serious offenses, even though isolated, warrant separation from the Naval Service to maintain proper order and discipline. Absence in excess of 30 days is considered a serious offense by the UCMJ; punishable by punitive discharge (Bad Conduct Discharge or Dishonorable Discharge) and confinement for up to 12 months when the absence is terminated by surrender. The Applicant’s misconduct documents multiple periods of unauthorized absence and a general failure to conform to military rules and regulations. The Applicant’s command determined that his conduct was detrimental to the good order and discipline of the command and brought discredit upon the service; as such, they determined that the misconduct warranted punitive action via trial by court - martial. Facing the punitive actions of a S pecial C ourt -M artial, the Applicant requested administrative discharge in lieu of trial by court - martial.

Characterization of service at discharge is based on recognition of a Sailor’s performance and conduct and is not necessarily dependent upon the narrative reason for separation. When the quality of a member’s service has met the standards of accepted conduct and performance of duty for military personnel, it is appropriate to characterize that service under Honorable conditions. An Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge, however, 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 Naval Service. The NDRB found that the evidence of record, along with the Applicant’s statement and supporting documentation, did not contain sufficient mitigating or extenuating factors to offset the seriousness of the offenses for which the discharge was awarded. Moreover, t he NDRB determined the Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, did reflect an act or omission that was a significant departure from the conduct expected of a service member. As such, the NDRB agreed unanimously that the punishment, as awarded, was warranted and equitable; it was, and remains, a proper reflection of the Applicant’s service and reason for discharge. The NDRB determined that the Applicant’s characterization of service at discharge was appropriate. Accordingly, relief is denied.

The Applicant presented a statement attesting to his educational accomplishments since his separation from the Navy . The Applicant could have provided documentation as detailed in the Post-Service Conduct paragraph in the Addendum , with the recognition that completion of these items alone does not guarantee an upgrade from an unfavorable discharge. Each discharge is reviewed by the Board, on a case-by-case basis, to determine if the post-service conduct establishes that the in-service misconduct was an aberration. Without post-service documentary evidence, the Board determined the awarded characterization of service shall remain Under Other Than Honorable Conditions. 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 NDRB determined that Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reason for separation shall remain IN LIEU OF TRIAL BY COURT MARTIAL. The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing for a period of fifteen years from the date of her discharge. The Applicant is directed to the Addendum, specifically the paragraphs titled Additional Reviews 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 | 2012_Marine | MD1201292

    Original file (MD1201292.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Clemency 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 of discharge. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100036

    Original file (ND1100036.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. ” Additional Reviews : After...

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1100572

    Original file (MD1100572.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to:ENTRY LEVEL SEPARATION Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USMCR (DEP)20020619 - 20030602Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20030603Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: Years MonthsDate of Discharge:20050812Highest Rank:Length of Service: Year(s)Month(s)10 Day(s)Education Level: AFQT:51MOS: 0300Proficiency/Conduct Marks (# of occasions):2.1/1.2Fitness Reports: Awards and...

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1100830

    Original file (MD1100830.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant contends he was never informed of the charges against him when he submitted the request for separation in lieu of trial.6. Additionally, I understand that a separation with a characterization of service under other than honorable conditions is authorized. ” 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.

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1100599

    Original file (MD1100599.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant was notified - in writing - of the Command’s intent to process him for administrative separation due to Misconduct (Drug Abuse) in accordance with paragraph 6210.5 of the MARCORSEPMAN with a recommendation for characterization of service as Under Other Than Honorable Conditions. Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, service record entries, and the discharge process, the NDRB determined that Therefore, the...

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1100564

    Original file (MD1100564.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USMCR (DEP)20080320 - 20080511Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20080512Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: Years MonthsDate of Discharge:20100304Highest Rank:Length of Service: Year Months23 DaysEducation Level: AFQT:61MOS: 3043Proficiency/Conduct Marks (# of occasions):()/()Fitness Reports: Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):Rifle...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100401

    Original file (ND1100401.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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1100577

    Original file (MD1100577.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s service record contains a complete copy of the administrative discharge package, which was reviewed to ensure the Applicant was afforded all rights as provided in the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual (MARCORSEPMAN).The Applicant was notified - in writing - of the Command’s intent to process the Applicant for administrative separation for Misconduct (Drug Abuse) in accordance with paragraph 6210.5 of the MARCORSEPMAN. He further directed that, upon his discharge,...

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1100294

    Original file (MD1100294.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USMCR (DEP)20040830 - 20040912Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20040913Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: Years MonthsDate of Discharge:20051213Highest Rank:Length of Service: Year(s)Month(s)1 Day(s)Education Level: AFQT:34MOS: 0300Proficiency/Conduct Marks (# of occasions):()/1.9()Fitness Reports: Awards and Decorations (per DD...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101231

    Original file (ND1101231.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant did not identify any issues to the NDRB. The NDRB does not issue automatic upgrades.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 . ”...