Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100438
Original file (ND1100438.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-CSSN, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20101207
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)        20020329 - 20020428     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20020429     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20040908      Highest Rank/Rate: CSSN
Length of Service: Y ear s M onth s 10 D a ys
Education Level:        AFQT: 35
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 2.0 ( 2 )      Behavior: 1.5 ( 2 )        OTA: 1.75

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      NDSM NAVY “ E ” (2) OSR SSDR

Periods of C ONF :

NJP : 3

- 20030220 :      Article 86 (Absence without leave, 2 specifications )
         Specification 1: 0600 - 0615, 20030209
         Specification 2: 0500 - 0515, 20030210
          Article 91 (Insubordinate conduct toward a warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or a petty officer)
         Awarded: RIR FOP RESTR EPD Suspended: RIR

- 20030604 :      Article 86 (Absence without leave, UA, 3 specifications )
         Specification 1: 1030 - 1200, 20030313
         Specification 2: 1530 - 1700, 20030313
         Specification 3: 0730 - 0745, 20030514
         Article 91 (Insubordinate conduct toward a warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or a petty officer, 3 specifications )
         Specification 1: Disobeyed a petty officer by using profanity and yelling in the serving line
         Specification 2: Disobeyed a petty officer by failing to remove his W alkman from the ship’s galley
         Specification 3: Disrespectful in language to a petty officer by saying “Fuck You,” or words to that effect
         Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation, 5 specifications )
         Specification 1: Wrongfully wearing a tongue piercing on duty
          Specification 2: Failed to report to the ship’s galley for work as ordered
         Specification 3: Failed to stay out of the food service office during working hours
         Specification 4: Failed to have summer dress uniform ready for inspection
         Specification 5: Failed to have turkey pot pie on serving line as ordered
         Awarded : RIR FOP 2 months CCU 30 days Susp ended: RIR FOP 1 month

- 20040622:      Article 80 (Attempt to depart the ship with a liberty card no t his own, 20040621)
         Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation, fail to return to the ship on time, 20040612)
         Awarded: FOP RESTR Suspended: NONE
S CM : NONE       SPCM: NONE       C C : NONE

Retention Warning Counseling : 2

- 20030220:      For absence without leave and insubordinate conduct toward a warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer

 - 20030604 :       For three absences without leave, willful disobedience to a warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or a petty officer on two occasions, contempt or disrespect to a warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or a petty officer, violation or failure to obey order or regulation, dereliction in the performance of duties, and failure to obey order or regulation on three occasions

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), re-issued October 2002, effective 22 August 2002 until 25 April 2005, 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 believes he had personality adjustment issues.
2.       The Applicant faults youth and immaturity for his misconduct.
3.       The Applicant believes his post-service conduct is worthy of consideration.

Decision

Date: 2012 0223             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 Board did complete a thorough review of the circumstances that l ed to discharge and the discharge process to ensure the pertinent standards of equity and propriety were met. The Applicant’s record of service included NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13) warnings and for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 80 (Attempts, ), Article ( , ), Article ( , ), and Article ( , ). Based on the offense s committed by the Applicant, command administratively processed for separation. When notified of administrative separation processing using the procedure, the Applicant rights to co nsult with a qualified counsel and submit a written statement.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant mentions that he had difficulty adjusting to military lifestyle and organization while he was overseas . There is nothing in the Applicant’s medical or service records that indicate that he was either not responsible for his actions or should not be held accountable for his misconduct. Violation of UCMJ Articles 80, 91 , and 92 are all considered serious offenses that warrant a punitive discharge after adjudication at a court-martial. The Applicant’s command, however, decided to take the more lenient route by administratively discharging him with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization of service. Relief denied.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant faults youth and immaturity for his misconduct. T he record clearly reflects that the Applicant was responsible for his actions when he chose to engage in numerous acts of misconduct and should be held accountable. Further, the record reflects repeated and willful misconduct and that the Applicant had no potential for further service. The NDRB determined the Applicant ’ s youth or age was not a mitigating factor in his misconduct. In the absence of substantial and credible evidence, the NDRB determined an upgrade would be inappropriate for this issue. Relief denied.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends that his post-service conduct warrants consideration for upgrading the characterization of h is service to Honorable. The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the re-characterization of a discharge. However, there is no law, or regulation, that provides that an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on good conduct in civilian life subsequent to leaving the service. The Applicant submitted completion and participation certificates for various courses such as anger management, combat stress, a psychiatric course, and vocational rehabilitation along with letters of char acter reference from counselors and associates . Unfortunately, this was not sufficient to evaluate h is post-ser vice character and conduct. His efforts needed to have been more encompassing. H e could have provided documentation as specified in the Post-Service Conduct paragraph in the Addendum , however, submission 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. 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 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 | 2011_Navy | ND1100963

    Original file (ND1100963.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’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 does not have the authority to change a narrative reason for separation to one indicating a medical disability or other...

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1001852

    Original file (MD1001852.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’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 does not have the authority to change a narrative reason for separation to one indicating a medical disability or other...

  • 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 | 2011_Navy | ND1101605

    Original file (ND1101605.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant seeks an upgrade in order to receive health benefits. ” 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. A request for a waiver can be submitted during the processing of a formal...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1002152

    Original file (ND1002152.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’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.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100986

    Original file (ND1100986.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 .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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100871

    Original file (ND1100871.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Relief denied.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 | 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101726

    Original file (ND1101726.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ” 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. 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. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a...

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1101733

    Original file (MD1101733.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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