Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100868
Original file (ND1100868.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-SR, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20110222
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)        19970929 - 19971221     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Current Enlistment: 19971222     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 19990716      Highest Rank/Rate: SA
Length of Service: Year(s) Month(s) 20 D ay(s)
 Education Level:        AFQT: 51
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: NFIR         Behavior: NFIR   OTA: NFIR

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      NONE

Periods of UA : 1998122 9-19981230, 1 day. CONF:

NJP :

- 19990114 :      Article ( Absence without leave - UA from 19981010 until 19981225, 85 days)
         Article (Missing ship’s movement on 19981002)
         Awarded: Suspended:

- 19990610 :      Article ( Absence without leave , 3 specifications )
         Specification 1: 19990406 until 19990412, 6 days
         Specification 2: 19990419 until 19990517, 2 8 days
         Specification 3: 19990601 until 19990606, 5 days
         Awarded: Suspended:

S CM :   SPCM:   C C :

Retention Warning Counseling:

         - 19990119:      For his misconduct. [Extracted from CO’s Recommendation for Administrative Separation]

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 ”
         “ 98OCT01-98DEC25; 98DEC29-98DEC30; 99APR06-99APR12; 99APR19-99MAY17; 99JUN01-99JUN06 ”

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 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 that youth and immaturity were contributing factors in his misconduct.
2.       The Applicant believes his post-service conduct is worthy of consideration.

Decision

Date: 20 1 2 0516             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 Board did complete a thorough review of the circumstances that led to discharge and the discharge process to ensure discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety. The Applicant’s record of service included NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13) warning and for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 86 (Absence without leave, 4 specifications ) . Based on the offenses committed by the Applicant, command administratively processed for separation. When notified of administrative separation processing using the procedure, the Applicant waived rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request an administrative board a General Court-Mar tial Convening Authority review .

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends that youth and immaturity were contributing factors in his misconduct. While the Applicant may feel his youth and immaturity were the underlying causes of his misconduct, the record clearly reflects his willful misconduct and demonstrated he was unfit for further service. The evidence of record does not demonstrate the Applicant was not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions. The NDRB recognizes that many of our servicemembers are young at the time they enlist for service, however, most still manage to serve honorably. While some members may be less mature than others, the NDRB does not view a member’s claim of immaturity to be a mitigating factor or a sufficient reason for misconduct. Relief denied.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant believes his post-service conduct is worthy of consideration . The NDRB considers 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. The Applicant provided a personal statement, along with h is testimony, evidence of employment, and six character references. The Applicant could have provided documentation as detailed 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 that the in-service misconduct was an aberration. To warrant an upgrade, the Applicant’s post-service efforts need to be more encompassing. The Board determined that the documentation submitted by the Applicant does not demonstrate if in-service misconduct was an aberration. The characterization of service received was appropriate considering the length of service and UCMJ violations. 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 is not eligible for further review from the NDRB. The Applicant may petition the Board for Correction of Naval Records, 701 South Courthouse Road, Suite 1001, Arlington, VA 22204-2490 for further review using DD Form 149. Their website can be found at http://www.donhq.navy.mil/bcnr/bcnr.htm.


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 | 2009_Navy | ND0902623

    Original file (ND0902623.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.Applicant seeks an upgrade to reenlist in the military.2. When notified of administrative separation processing using the procedure, the Applicant had an opportunity to defend himself, but waived rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request an administrative board or a General Court-Martial Convening Authority review. ” Additional Reviews...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101466

    Original file (ND1101466.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: Pertinent Regulation/Law A. Relief denied.Summary:...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0902035

    Original file (ND0902035.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)19990810 - 19990830Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 19990831Age at Enlistment:Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20000331Highest Rank/Rate:SRLength of Service: Year(s)Month(s)01 Day(s)Education Level:AFQT: 34EvaluationMarks:Performance:NFIRBehavior:NFIROTA: NFIRAwards and Decorations (per DD 214):NONEPeriods of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801289

    Original file (ND0801289.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 conduct mitigates the reason for the characterization of discharge.The Applicant provided a personal statement,but as evidence of post-service accomplishments. The Board determined an upgrade was inappropriate.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201030

    Original file (ND1201030.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant professes her regrets for her misconduct while in the service and seeks a change in her RE-code to reenlist.2. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100965

    Original file (ND1100965.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to:ADMINISTRATIVE Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)20080325 - 20080824Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20080825Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20090506Highest Rank/Rate: CSSRLength of Service: Years Months 12 DaysEducation Level:AFQT: 36EvaluationMarks:Performance:1.0(1)Behavior:1.0(1)OTA: 1.29Awards and Decorations (per DD...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201714

    Original file (ND1201714.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 | 2012_Navy | ND1201165

    Original file (ND1201165.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1002291

    Original file (ND1002291.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Summary of ServicePrior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)19990129 - 19990510Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 19990511Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20000630Highest Rank/Rate: AALength of Service: YearMonth20 DaysEducation Level:AFQT: 46EvaluationMarks:Performance:NFIRBehavior:NFIROTA: NFIRAwards and Decorations (per DD 214):NONEPeriods of UA/CONF:...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1501104

    Original file (ND1501104.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a careful review of the Applicant’s length of service, the circumstances surrounding the Applicant’s misconduct, the Applicant’s voluntary surrender to military authorities, evidence that the Applicant did not have counsel during the administrative separation process, and his post-service conduct, the NDRB determined that partial relief was warranted to upgrade his discharge to General (Under Honorable Conditions). Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include...