Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100309
Original file (ND1100309.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-SR, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20101116
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)        19990716 - 19990726     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 19990727     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20010621      Highest Rank/Rate: SN
Length of Service: Y ear( s ) M onth( s ) 26 D a y ( s )
 Education Level:        AFQT: 32
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 2.0 ( 2 )      Behavior: 1.0 ( 2 )        OTA: 1.67
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):     

Periods of C ONF :

NJP :

- 20000529 :      Article (U nauthorized absence )
         Article (Insubordinate conduct toward warrant, noncommissioned, petty officer , 3 specifications )
         Specification 1: Disrespect in language tow ard a First Cla ss Petty Officer
         Specification 2: F ailure to obey a lawful order f rom a First C lass Petty Officer
         Specification 3: N ot found in record (N FIR )
         Article (Disobey a lawful order from the Commanding Officer)
         Awarded: Suspended:

- 20000607 :      Article , 2 specifications (Failure to go at the time prescribed to appointed place of duty, to wit restricted personnel muster , )
         Awarded : Susp ended:

- 20000621 :      Article (Failure to go to restricted muster)
         Article 1 1 3 (Sleeping while posted as aft fantail lookout)
         Awarded : Susp ended:

- 20000622 :      Article (Failure to go at the time prescribed to appointed place of duty, to wit : restricted personnel muster)
         Awarded : Susp ended:

- 20000629 :      Article (Failure to go at the time prescribed to appointed place of duty, to wit : restricted personnel muster)
         Awarded : Susp ended:

- 20000705 :      Article ( Failure to go at the prescribed time to appointed place of duty, to wit : restricted personnel muster , 2 specifications )
         Awarded : Susp ended:

- 20000712 :      Article (Disrespectful in la nguage and deportment toward a Third Class P ett y O fficer)
         Awarded : Susp ended:

- 20000721 :      Article (Failure to go at the time prescribed to appointed place of duty, to wit: restricted personnel muster)
         Awarded : Susp ended:

- 20010420 :      Article (Failure to go at the time prescribed to appointed place of duty, to wit: restricted personnel muster)
         Article (Insubordinate conduct toward warrant, noncommissioned, petty officer , 2 specifications )
         Specification 1: Failure to obey a lawful order from a Third Class Petty O fficer
         Specification 2: Disrespectful in la nguage and deportment toward a Third C lass Petty O fficer
         Awarded : Susp ended:

- 20010426 :      Article (Failure to go at the time prescribed to appointed place of duty, to wit: restricted personnel muster)
          Article (Insubordinate conduct toward warrant, noncommissioned, petty officer, 2 specifications )
         Specification 1: Failure to obey a lawful order from a Third Class Petty O fficer
         Specification 2: Disrespectful in language and de portment toward a Third Class Petty O fficer
         Awarded : 3 days Susp ended:

S CM :    SPCM:    C C :

Retention Warning Counseling :

         Date not found in record : Extracted from commanding officer’s remarks in separation letter.

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

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

         “ UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS ”
         “ PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT ”

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 22, effective 15 December 1998 until
21 August 2002, 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 emotional problems following a rape caused the Applicant to lose motivation , which mitigates her misconduct. She further contends she received no mental healt h assistance for her problems.
2. Post-service conduct.

Decision

Date : 2012 0206             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 one NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13) warning and ten for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article (Unauthorized absence, 1 1 specifications ), Article ( , 8 specifications ), Article (Failure to obey an order or regulation, ), and Article 1 1 3 ( Sleeping on watch , ). 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 administrative board.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends emotional problems following a rape caused the Applicant to lose motivation , which mitigates her misconduct. She further contends she received no mental health assistance for her problems. Careful examination of the Applicant’s service and medical record s revealed no indication the Applicant reported rape or was treated for rape - related injuries. The record shows the Applicant saw a mental health provider on several occasions. Medical records show the Applicant was having difficulties in the workplace and in the social environment of the ship. Medical records do not reveal any diagnosis that might have mitigated the Applicant’s misconduct. The Applicant submitted no documentation or evidence to support her contention or to overcome the NDRB’s presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs. The NDRB determined an upgrade would be inappropriate. Relief denied.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant requested the NDRB consider post - service conduct as a basis to gain a more thorough understanding of performance and conduct during the period of service under review. The Applicant provided no documentation or evidence to support a post-service conduct review. The Applicant’s medical records show she has served in the Army since being separated from the Navy. The Applicant ’ s post-service documentation efforts need to be more encompassing. The Applicant could have provided documentation as specified 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 if post - service conduct establishes a reason to change the characterization or narrative reason. Due to the lack of documentation, and in light of the serious and repeated nature of the Applicant’s misconduct, the NDRB determined an upgrade would be inappropriate.

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 | 2013_Marine | MD1301472

    Original file (MD1301472.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. Regulations limit the NDRB’s review solely to a determination of the propriety and the equity of a discharge.Issue 2: (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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801139

    Original file (ND0801139.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. 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 MISCONDUCT - . ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301530

    Original file (ND1301530.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge to help an Applicant’s life or to help him support his family. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1300743

    Original file (ND1300743.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends his post-service conduct warrants consideration for an upgrade. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101000

    Original file (ND1101000.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 Government affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant. ” Additional Reviews :...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600520

    Original file (ND0600520.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant also violated Article 91 of the UCMJ, disrespectful in language to a Third Class Petty Officer in the performance of duty. Dismissed.930527: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Specification: On or about 0715, 930506, without authority, fail to go to restricted muster in the hangar bay. Your Commanding Officers Nonjudicial Punishment on board USS TRIPOLI (LPH 10) of 930402, violation of the UCMJ, Article 92, Spec: On or about 920321, fail to obey a lawful order issued by the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301090

    Original file (ND1301090.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board determined that the documentation submitted by the Applicant does not warrant relief. 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 .Since 15 years have elapsed since the date of his discharge, the Applicant is not eligible for a personal...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900116

    Original file (ND0900116.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board determined the awarded discharge characterization was appropriate and an upgrade would be inappropriate.The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received at the NDRB within 15 years from the date of discharge. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000961

    Original file (ND1000961.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Based on the seriousness of the offense and the pattern of misconduct established by the misconduct of record, the Command recommended separation with an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions characterization of service at discharge.Upon review of the Applicant’s record of service, the NDRB determined the Applicant engaged in conduct involving one or more acts or omissions that constituted a significant departure from the conduct expected of members of the Naval Service. ” Additional...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900581

    Original file (ND0900581.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board determined the awarded discharge was appropriate 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 and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant Complaint Procedures : If you believe that the decision in your case is unclear, not responsive to the issues you raised, or does not otherwise comport with the...