Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100734
Original file (ND1100734.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-FC3, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20110125
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)        19990331 - 19990727     Active:            19990728 - 20021015

Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Current Enlistment: 20021016     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20070104      Highest Rank/Rate: FC2
Length of Service: Year(s) Month(s) 20 D ay(s)
 Education Level:        AFQT: 84
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 3.8 ( 6 )      Behavior: 2.8 ( 6 )        OTA: 3.37

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      (2) (2) E S WS CG S OSR

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP :

- 20061121 :      Article (Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, noncommissioned officer)
         Article (General A rticle)
         Awarded: Suspended: (15 days)

- 20061215 :      Article (Failure to obey order or regulation)
         Awarded: Suspended: Vacated this date

S CM :    SPCM:    C C :      Retention Warning Counseling:

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

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

          “CONTINUOUS HONORABLE ACTIVE SERVICE FROM 990728 UNTIL 021015 ”
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 92 .



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

Applicant’s Issues

 1.       The Applicant contends his prior record of service, as evidenced by his evaluations and awards, war rants an upgrade.
2.       The Applicant contends his post-service conduct warrants an upgrad e .

Decision

Date: 20 1 2 0412             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 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 did not include any NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13) warnings or trials by court-martial. However, it did include non-judicial punishments for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 91 ( Insubordinate conduct toward warrant, noncommissioned, petty officer , 1 specification ), Article 92 ( Failure to obey order or regulation, 1 specification) , and Article 134 ( General Article, 1 specification) . Based on the offenses committed by the Applicant, command administratively processed for separation. The NDRB did not have the Applicant’s administrative separation package to determine whether Applicant waived rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request an administrative board .

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his prior record of service, as evidenced by his evaluations and awards , warrants upgrading his discharge. Despite a service member’s prior record of service, certain serious offenses warrant separation from the Navy to maintain proper order and discipline. Violation of Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation) is one such offense that warrants separation regardless of performance, grade, or time in service. The Applicant’s record of service did not include any information explaining the circumstances surroun ding the Article 92 violation. According to the Applicant, he violated a standing order when he viewed pornographic material on a government computer. Violating Article 92 usually results 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. However, his command did not pursue a punitive discharge but opted instead for the more lenient administrative discharge with a G eneral characterization of service. The NDRB found the characterization of the Applicant ’ s discharge was less severe than that given others in similar circumstance s . The NDRB determined that relief was not warranted. Relief denied.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his post-service conduct, as evidenced by his efforts to better himself and his employment at a shipyard, warrants upgrading his discharge. 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 the passage of time or good conduct in civilian life subsequent to leaving the service. Normally, to permit relief, a procedural impropriety or inequity must have been found to exist during the period of enlistment in question. The Applicant did not submit any post-service documentation to evaluate his post-service c onduct. He could have submitted documentation as specified in the Post-Service Conduct paragraph in the Addendum , however, c ompletion 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 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

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101582

    Original file (ND1101582.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant wants to re-enlist. The Board determined that relief based on this issue was 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 | 2011_Navy | ND1101297

    Original file (ND1101297.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After reading the Applicant’s statement and reviewing the record of service, the NDRB determined that the discharge was proper and equitable and that relief based on this issue is not warranted. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101206

    Original file (ND1101206.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board did complete a thorough review of the circumstances that led to discharge and the discharge process to ensure the pertinent standards of equity and propriety were met.The Applicant’s record of service included for of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ):Article(,, 0730 - 0815, 10 October 2008), Article (,, wrongfully using government credit card to obtain cash and merchandise), and Article (Wrongful appropriation, , steal money from property of Bank of America in the amount...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101528

    Original file (ND1101528.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: DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100342

    Original file (ND1100342.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. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities. If the action includes either a punitive or administrative discharge for misconduct or for any basis wherein an Other Than Honorable...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1401372

    Original file (ND1401372.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 | 2010_Navy | ND1000131

    Original file (ND1000131.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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101292

    Original file (ND1101292.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant contends his discharge was too harsh.The NDRB reviews the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge individually, on a case-by-case basis. ” 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. Automatic Upgrades - There is no law or regulation that provides for an unfavorable discharge to be...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101497

    Original file (ND1101497.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Violation of Articles 92 and 107 are two such offenses that warrant processing for administrative separation regardless of grade, performance, or time in service. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301346

    Original file (ND1301346.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 29 January 2004, an Administrative Separation Board determined by a vote of 3-0 that a preponderance of evidence supported the Applicant’s commission of a serious offense, 3-0 that the Applicant be administratively separated from the Navy, and 3-0 that the Applicant’s characterization of service be Under Other Than Honorable Conditions. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the...