Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101294
Original file (ND1101294.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-HA, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20110421
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)        20070619 - 20080902     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Current Enlistment: 20080903     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20091202      Highest Rank/Rate: HA
Length of Service: Year(s) Month(s) 00 D ay(s)
 Education Level:        AFQT: 36
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 2.0 ( 1 )      Behavior: 1.0 ( 1 )        OTA: 1.50

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):     

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP :     S CM :    SPCM:    C C :

Retention Warning Counseling:

- 20090714 :      For disciplinary review board for violations of UCMJ A rticle 86, Absence without leave and Article 92, F ailure to obey order or regulation

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. The Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 29, effective 10 November 2009 until
12 April 2010, Article 1910-156, SEPARATION BY REASON OF UNSATISFACTORY PERFORMANCE.

 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 the Navy did not keep its promise to train him as a Hospital Corpsman.
 2.       The Applicant requests a change in his Narrative Reason for Separation.
3 .       The Applicant contends he was unjustly punished at non-judicial punishment (NJP) for going absent without leave.
Decision

Date: 20 1 2 0821             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 non-judicial punishments or trials by court-martial for violation s of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). However, it did include NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13) warning . The Applicant’s service record contained an Evaluation Report and Record of Counseling that reflect ed marks of 1.0 on three performance traits , therefore, meeting the requirements for separation due to U nsatisfactory P erformance. According to Naval Message dated 22 September 2009, Navy Personnel Command reviewed the Applicant for a forced rating conversion . The forced rating conversion was disapproved and administrative separation was directed because the needs of the Navy did not support retaining the Applicant. The Applicant’s command concurred with Navy Personnel Command and administratively processed him 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 a General Court-Martial Convening Authority review.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends t he Navy did not keep its promise to train him as a Hospital Corpsman. According to the Applicant, he received orders to 3 rd Medical Battalion to work as a supply clerk instead. A ccording to documentation found in his service record, he was being trained to serve as a Hospital Corpsman. However, while at a follow-on school at Field Medical Training Battalion, Camp Pendleton, he failed to meet the minimum academic standards to serve as a Corpsman . Navy Personnel C ommand conducted a review to determine whether to convert him to a new rating, but disapproved it. The NDRB concluded t hat relief based on this issue was not warranted. Relief denied.

 : (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant requests a change in his Narrative Reason for Separation. The Applicant was discharged for Unsatisfactory Performance. According to Navy regulations, members may be separated when they are unqualified for further Naval Service as demonstrated by one or more enlisted performance evaluation s with 1.0 mark s for any performance trait . The Applicant’s service record contained an Evaluation Report and Record of Counseling that reflects he received 1.0 marks on three performanc e traits. The report states that the Applicant did not complete the Field Medical Service Technician Course due to academic disenrollment from two classes. The NDRB concluded that the assigned N arrative R eason for S eparation was proper and no other narrative reason more accurately describes why the Applicant was discharge d . Therefore, relief based on this issue is not warranted. Relief denied.
: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends he was unjustly punished at NJP proceedings for going absent without leave and was subsequently discharged . The Applicant’s record of servi ce does not include any NJPs or trials by court s -martial for violation s of the UCMJ. However, it does indicate the Applicant received a retention warning after he appeared befo re a Disciplinary Review Board for violat ing Article 86 (Absence without leave) and Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation) of the UCMJ. The Applicant was warned about going absent without leave and disobeying orders. He was never punished, and his misconduct was not the reason for his discharge. He was discharged based on his unsatisfactory academic performance . Therefore, relief based on this issue is not warranted. 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), 701 South Courthouse Road, Suite 1001, Arlington, VA 22204-2490 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 | 2010_Navy | ND1000154

    Original file (ND1000154.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)20071127 - 20080408Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20080409Age at Enlistment:Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20090705Highest Rank/Rate:YNSNLength of Service: Year(s)Month(s)27 Day(s)Education Level:AFQT: 53EvaluationMarks:Performance:1.5(2)Behavior:2.5(2)OTA: 2.17Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):Pistol...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201689

    Original file (ND1201689.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends his discharge was inequitable, because it was based on an isolated incident.2. Violation of Articles 107 and 121 are two such offenses that warrant processing for administrative separation regardless of grade, performance, or time in service. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100939

    Original file (ND1100939.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends his discharge is too harsh. 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 .The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1300692

    Original file (ND1300692.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 | 2010_Navy | ND1002094

    Original file (ND1002094.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends his discharge is improper, because it was based on an incorrect diagnosis of personality disorder.2. Representation: 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301236

    Original file (ND1301236.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. 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 reviews from the NDRB. ” Additional Reviews :...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100799

    Original file (ND1100799.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)20050818 - 20060213Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20060214Age at Enlistment:Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20070226Highest Rank/Rate:SA Length of Service:Year(s)Month(s) 13 Day(s)Education Level:AFQT: 61EvaluationMarks:Performance:2.0(1)Behavior:1.0(1)OTA: 2.00Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):Periods of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301391

    Original file (ND1301391.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 | 2011_Navy | ND1100077

    Original file (ND1100077.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant seeks a change in his RE code. Representation: 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 discharge if such change is warranted.In reviewing...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900954

    Original file (ND0900954.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: Substance Abuse: Criminal Records: Family/Personal Status: Community Service: References: Additional Statements: From Applicant: From Representation:From Congress member: Other Documentation: DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL...