Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101302
Original file (ND1101302.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-CSSN, 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)        200 11130 - 20011218     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20011219     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20050926      Highest Rank/Rate: CSSN
Length of Service: Y ear( s ) M onth( s ) 08 D a y ( s )
 Education Level:        AFQT: 34
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 2.7 ( 3 )      Behavior: 1.7 ( 3 )        OTA: 2.39

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP :

- 20040520 :      Article (Absence without leave , 12 specifications )
         Specification 1: Failure to go to his appointed place of duty on 0430, 20030430
         Specification 2: Failure to go to his appointed place of duty on 0530, 20030507
         Specification 3: Failure to go to his appointed place of duty on 0836, 20030602
         Specification 4: Failure to go to his appointed place of duty on 0555, 20030603
         Specification 5: Failure to go to his appointed place of duty on 0600, 20030703
         Specification 6: Failure to go to his appointed place of duty on 0545, 20030709
         Specification 7: Failure to go to his appointed place of duty on 0545, 20030711
         Specification 8: Failure to go to his appointed place of duty on 0600, 20030712
         Specification 9: Failure to go to his appointed place of duty on 0545, 20030813
         Specification 10: Failure to go to his appointed place of duty on 1830, 20030820
         Specification 11: Failure to go to his appointed place of duty on 2018, 20040412-20040414 (2 days)
         Specification 12: Failure to go to his appointed place of duty on 1720, 20040419-20040517 (28 days)
         Article (Missing movement on 0930, 20040414)
          Article (Failure to obey a lawful order or regulation)
         Article (General A rticle, check worthless, making and uttering - by dishonorable failing to maintain funds , 8 specifications )
         Specification 1: On 20030123
         Specification 2: On 20030215
         Specification 3 and 4 : On 20030114, 2 checks on this date
          Specification 5 : On 20030202
          Specification 6 : On 20030 205
         Specification 7 : On 20030211
         Specification 8 : On 20030212
         Awarded : Susp ended:

- 2005 0407 :      Article (Absence without leave , 2 specifications )
         Specification 1: Failure to go to his appointed place of duty on 0445, 20050302
         Specification 2: Absence from USS Preble at 0445, 20050319 until 0708, 20050321 (3 days)
         Article (Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer on 20050215)
         Awarded: Suspended:

S CM :    SPCM:    C C :

Retention Warning Counseling :

- 20040108 :       For failure to meet Physical Readiness Test (PRT) standards .

- 20040615 :       For violation of UCMJ A rticle 86, A bsence without leave, A rticle 87, M issing movement, A rticle 92, F ailure to obey order or regulation, and A rticle 134, F ailure to maintain sufficient funds.
- 20050407 :       For violation of UCMJ A rticle 86, A bsence without leave, failure to go to his appointed place of duty on 0445 20050302, absence from U SS Preble at 0445, 20050319 until 0708, 20050321 and A rticle 91, Insubordinate conduct toward a petty officer .

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

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

          Block 28, “ MISCONDUCT (SERIOUS OFFENSE) ”
         Block 29, “ 04APR 12 TO 04APR14, 04APR19 TO 04MAY 17, and 05MAR 19 TO 05MAR 21 ”

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 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 s 87, 91, 92, and 134 .



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

Applicant’s Issues

 1.       The Applicant contends his discharge was improper , because it was based on one incident , and he had problems controlling his anger .

Decision

Date: 20 1 2 0725             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 included NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13) warnings and non-judicial punishments for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 86 ( Unauthorized a bsence, 14 specification) , Article 87 ( Missing movement, 1 specification), Article 91 ( Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer, 1 specification ), Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation, 1 specificat ion), and Article 134 (General A rticle , Check, worthless, making and uttering by dishonorably failing to maintain funds, 1 specification). 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 a General Court-Martial Convening Authority review .

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his discharge was improper , because it was based on one incident , and he had problems controlling his anger . The Applicant had multiple violations of the UCMJ throughout his less than four years of service . Despite a service member’s prior record of service, certain serious offenses warrant separation from the Nav y to maintain proper order and discipline. Violation s of Articles 87, 91, 92, and 134 are considered serious offenses and can warrant processing for administrative separation regardless of grade, performance, or time in service. Missing movement, insubordinate conduct, failing to obey orders or regulations, and making worthless checks usu ally result 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. The Applicant’s command did not pursue a punitive discharge but opted instead for the more lenient administrative discharge. Considering the numerous violations of the UCMJ, to include a violation of Article 86 for a period of 28 days, t he NDRB concluded that the characterization of the Applicant ’ s discharge was very equitable . 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 | 2005_Navy | ND0500253

    Original file (ND0500253.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Sentence: Forfeiture of $50.00 per month for 1 month, confinement for 30 days, reduced to E-1.CA action 030306: Sentence approved and ordered executed.030420: Review of Summary court-martial: SJA recommends approval of charge I and the specification thereunder, disapproval of charge II and the specifications thereunder, but approval of the lesser included offense of missing...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201261

    Original file (ND1201261.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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100604

    Original file (ND1100604.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s record of service during her enlistment period reflects one NAVPERS 1070/613 retention-counseling warning being issued. Furthermore, the Applicant’s service record documents four nonjudicial punishments (NJPs) for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), specifically: Article 86 (Absent without leave, 4 specifications of unauthorized absence); Article 87 (Missing movement); Article 89 (Disrespect toward a superior commissioned officer); Article 91...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-01239

    Original file (ND99-01239.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    830820: Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (Unauthorized absence from NTC, Great Lakes, IL commencing on/or about 0545, 820913 and termination on/or about 0830, 820922 and Unauthorized absence from USS CHARLESTON (LKA-113), located at Norfolk, VA commencing on/or about 830307 and termination on/or about 830423), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning. After a thorough review of the records,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500936

    Original file (ND0500936.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). No indication of appeal in the record.030122: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with the least favorable characterization of service as general under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse and misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.030122: Applicant advised of rights and having...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00869

    Original file (ND02-00869.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00869 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020606, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. In the acknowledgement letter to the Applicant, the Applicant was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing. At this time, the applicant has not provided sufficient documentation of good character and conduct.

  • USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1400787

    Original file (MD1400787.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...

  • 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 | 2002_Navy | ND02-01125

    Original file (ND02-01125.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant's DD Form 214 (Member 1 and 4) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 990424 - 990527 COG Active: None Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 990528 Date of Discharge: 011105 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 02 05 08 Inactive: None 011028: Applicant...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101250

    Original file (ND1101250.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.Applicant seeks a discharge upgrade to increase employment opportunities. Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries and the administrative separation process, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reason for separation shall remain...