Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100080
Original file (ND1100080.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-AOAA, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20101013
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)        20040524 - 20040622     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20040623     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20060606      Highest Rank/Rate: AN
Length of Service : Y ear s M onth s 11 D a ys
Education Level:        AFQT: 55
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 2.3 ( 3 )      Behavior: 2.0 ( 3 )        OTA: 2.28

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      NDSM GWOTSM GWOTEM SSDR

NJP : 2

- 20050519:      Article 86 (Absence without leave, UA, 20050420 - 20050503, 24 days)
         Article 87 (Missing movement, 20050426)
         Awarded: FOP RESTR EPD Suspended: FOP
- 20060406 :      Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation, wrongfully wearing a doo-rag on liberty)
         Article 107 (False official statement, stated to chief that he was not wearing a head scarf)
         Awarded: RIR FOP RESTR EP D Suspended: RIR Suspension v acated 20060425

S CM : 1

- 20060513 :       Art icle 86 (Absence without leave, 2 specifications )
         Specification 1: UA, 20060507
         Specification 2: UA, 20060508
         Article 91 (Insubordinate conduct toward a petty officer, 2 specifications )
         Specification 1: Disrespect in deportment toward a first class petty officer on 20060506
         Specification 2: Disobeying a lawful order from a first class petty officer on 20060506
         Article 128 (Assault a SA on 20060407)
         Article 134 (Communicating a threat and disorderly conduct on 20060407)
          Sentence : CONF 30 days (20060513-20060616, 25 days) FOP

SPCM: NONE       C C : NONE

Retention Warning Counseling : 1

- 20050512 :       NFIR [ Date e xtracted from CO’s c omments in separation package]



Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

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

          “ 05 APR20 - 05MAY03, 06APR26 - 06 APR 28 , 06MAY13-06JUN06 ”
        
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 19 May 2008, 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.        The Applicant contends medical issues contributed to his misconduct.
 2.       The Applicant contends he was defending a female who was being sexually harassed at the time of his misconduct.
Decision

Date : 20 1 2 0419             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 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 one NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13) warning , two nonjudicial punishments (NJPs) for violations of the U niform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 86 (Absence without leave, UA, 20050420 - 20050503, 24 days) , Article 87 (Missing movement, 20050426) , Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation, wrongfully wearing a doo-rag on liberty) , and Article 107 (False official statement, stated to chief that he was not wearing a head scarf) , and one summary court-martial for violations of the UCMJ: Article 86 (Absence without leave, 2 specifications : Specification 1: UA, 20060507 and Specification 2: UA, 20060508 ), Article 91 (Insubordinate conduct toward a petty officer, 2 specifications : Spec ification 1: Disrespect in deportment toward a first class petty officer on 20060506 and Specification 2: Disobeying a lawful order from a first class petty officer on 20060506 ), Article 128 (Assault a SA on 20060407) , and Article 134 (Communicating a threat and disorderly conduct on 20060407) . Based on the offenses committed by the Applicant, his command administratively processed him for separation. When notified of administrative separation processing using the administrative board procedure, the Applicant waived his rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request an administrative board .

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends medical issues contributed to his misconduct. The Applicant’s medical records were not available. S ervice records contained no evidence to support the Applicant’s contention. The Applicant submitted no documentation to support his contention or to overcome the NDRB’s presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs. The record shows the Applicant displayed a clear pattern of misconduct and had several offenses that were serious in nature, warranting confinement and a punitive discharge if adjudicated at special court-martial. The NDRB found no evidence of impropriety or inequity in the Applicant’s separation proceedings. An upgrade would be inappropriate. Relief denied.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends he was defending a female who was being sexually harassed at the time of his misconduct. The record contained no evidence to support the Applicant’s contention. The Applicant provided no documentation or evidence to support his contention. No evidence of impropriety or inequity was noted in the record. An upgrade would be inappropriate. 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

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700734

    Original file (ND0700734.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s medical record also indicated a diagnosis, by competent medical authority, of personality disorder not otherwise specified. 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. With respect to a discharge adjudged by a court-martial, the action of the NDRB is restricted to upgrades based on clemency.

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1000015

    Original file (MD1000015.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. The NDRB found no other evidence in the Applicant’s medical or service records, nor did he provide any, to indicate PTSD was a mitigating factor in his misconduct to warrant consideration for an upgrade of his characterization.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, and medical record entries and discharge...

  • 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1101833

    Original file (MD1101833.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Regulations limit the NDRB’s review to a determination of the propriety and equity of the discharge.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. ...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800984

    Original file (ND0800984.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    He indicated he has been employed at Perec & Associates as a collector since August 2007.The Board applauds the Applicant’s educational pursuit and enlistment into the ANG; however, it was determined the documentation provided by the Applicant did not mitigate the misconduct that resulted in the characterization of discharge and an upgrade would be inappropriate.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record Entries, Discharge Process...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100178

    Original file (ND1100178.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Representation: 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 governmental affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0701105

    Original file (ND0701105.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Date: 20080117Location:Washington D.C Representation: Discussion : either which the Board cannot form the basis of relief for the Applicant, or the Board does not have the authority to grant the relief for which the Applicant petitioned. There is credible evidence in the record that the Applicant established a pattern of misconduct. Discharge Process Date Notified: 20050323Reason for Discharge:--Least Favorable Characterization: Date Applicant Responded to Notification:20050323Rights...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700292

    Original file (MD0700292.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Record of service. 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 Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214 The NDRB did note administrative error(s) on the original DD Form 214: “CONTINUOUS HONORABLE ACTIVE DUTY SERVICE FROM 980318 TO 020103 ” The NDRB will recommend to the Commandant of the Marine Corps that the...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700683

    Original file (MD0700683.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 ServicePrior Service: Inactive: USMCR (DEP)20040323 - 20040509 Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20040510Years Contracted:4; Extension: Date of Discharge:20060407Length of Service: 01 Yrs 10Mths28 DysLost Time:Days UA: Days Confined: Education Level:...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100614

    Original file (ND1100614.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant seeks an upgrade for veterans benefits.2. ” 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...