Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101370
Original file (ND1101370.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-AR, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20110506
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)        20020520 - 20020708     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20020709     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20040214      Highest Rank/Rate: AA
Length of Service: Y ear( s ) M onth( s ) 06 D a y ( s )
 Education Level:        AFQT: 64
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: NFIR         Behavior: NFIR   OTA: NFIR

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):     

Periods of UA : 20030825-20040214 (173 days)

NJP :

- 20030124 :      Article (Absence without leave , 4 specifications )
         Specification 1: from 20030104-20030105 ,
         Specification 2 : from 0600, 20030110 -0901, 20030113 , 3 days
         Specification 3: from 20030116-20030117
         Specification 4: from 0600 -1030, 20030122
         Article ( Larceny and wrongful appropriation)
         Awarded: Suspended:

S CM :

- 20030804 :       Art icle (Absence without leave , 2 specifications )
         Specification 1: from 0600 on 20030227 until 0708 20030227
         Specification 2: from 0600 on 20030403 until 20030724, 112 days
         Art icle (Disrespect toward superior commissioned officer)
          Sentence : CONF 22 days (20030804-20030821, 17 days)

SPCM:    C C :

Retention Warning Counseling :

- 20030124 :       For violation of UCMJ A r ticle 86, Absence without leave, 4 specifications





Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

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

                   Block 29, “ 03JAN04, 03JAN16, 03JAN10 TO 03JAN12, 03APR03 TO 03JUL24, 03AUG04 TO 03AUG21, 03AUG25 TO 04FEB14 ”

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), 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 seeks a change in his RE-code in order to reenlist into the Armed Forces .
2.       The Applicant contends that youth and immaturity were contributing factors in his misconduct .
Decision

Date: 20 1 2 0710             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 did identify one decisional issue to the Board. T he 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, for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article (Absence without leave, 4 specifications: [1] from 20030104-20030105; [2] from 0600, 20030110-0901, 20030113, 3 days; [3] from 20030116-20030117; [4] from 0600-1030, 20030122 ) and Article (Larceny and wrongful appropriation) , and for of the UCMJ: Article (Absence without leave, 2 specifications: [1] from 0600 on 20030227 until 0708 20030227; [2] from 0600 on 20030403 until 20030724, 112 days ) and Article (Disrespect toward superior commissioned officer) . 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 w ritten statement, and request an administrative separation board.

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant seeks a change in his RE-code in order to reenlist into the Armed Forces. 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 B oard for Correction of Naval Records 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.

: (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 determined the Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, reflected a significant departure from the conduct expected of a servicemember and that an upgrade was 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 | 2007_Navy | ND0700226

    Original file (ND0700226.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Date Applicant Responded to Notification:20030812 Rights Elected at Notification: Consult with Counsel Obtain Copies of Documents Submit Statement(s) (date) Administrative Board GCMCA review Separation Authority (date): COMMANDING OFFICER, CENTER OF CRYPTLOGY, CORRY STATION, PENSACOLA (20030909)Reason for discharge directed: - Characterization directed: Date Applicant Discharged: 20031027 Types of Documents Submitted by Applicant and Considered By BoardRelated to Military Service: Service...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001175

    Original file (ND1001175.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: Pertinent Regulation/Law A. Separation for personality...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700156

    Original file (MD0700156.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    An upgrade to honorable would be inappropriate.. Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USMCR (DEP)19990730 - 20000820Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20000821Years Contracted:Date of Discharge:20030210 Length of Service: 02 Yrs 05Mths10 DysLost Time:Days UA: Days Confined: Education Level: Age at Enlistment:AFQT: 31MOS:3381Highest Rank: Proficiency/Conduct marks (# of occasions): 3.8(7)/3.8(7)Fitness reports: Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):NATIONAL...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000904

    Original file (ND1000904.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    It also included summary courts-martial for of the UCMJ: Article 86 (Unauthorized absence, 12 specifications) and Article 134 (Breaking restriction, 2 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. Relief denied.Summary:...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0601051

    Original file (ND0601051.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Elements of Discharge: [INVOLUNTARY] Discharge Process: Date Notified:20030117Reason for Discharge erroneous entryLeast Favorable Characterization: Date Applicant Responded to Notification: 20030117Rights Elected at Notification:Consult with Counsel Administrative Board Obtain Copies Submit Statement Discharge directed by (date):COMMANDING OFFICER 20030123Narrative reason directed:ERRONEOUS ENTRYCharacterization directed: UNCHARACTERIZED Date Applicant Discharged: 20030128 Additional...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700708

    Original file (ND0700708.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Absent any documentation provided by the Applicant for the Board to consider, the Board determined that the Applicant’s service record did not mitigate the misconduct that resulted in the characterization of discharge. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Medical and Service Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found that Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USNR (DEP)...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101302

    Original file (ND1101302.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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, Articles 87, 91, 92,and 134. ” 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901582

    Original file (ND0901582.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant is requesting that his narrative reason be changed to a General discharge and the characterization of service upgraded to Honorable. Based on the seriousness and frequency of the offenses committed, performance evaluation marks, and lack of evidence of extenuating circumstances, the Board determined that an upgrade to Honorable is not appropriate.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, and...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700799

    Original file (ND0700799.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The record reflects that the Commanding Officer, USS PEARL HARBOR notified the Applicant of his intent to administratively separate the Applicant by reason of Convenience of the government – Personality Disorder per MILPERSMAN 1910-122 and that the least favorable characterization of service possible was General (Under Honorable Conditions). Discharge Process Date Notified: 20030114 Reason for Discharge: - Least Favorable Characterization: Date Applicant Responded to Notification:...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700563

    Original file (MD0700563.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a thorough review of the Applicant’s record, issues submitted, and the standards of discipline, the Board determined that clemency was not warranted. 200400779 Applicant Discharged: 20041203 Types of Documents Submitted by Applicant and Considered By BoardRelated to Military Service: Service and/or Medical Record:Other Records: Related to Post-Service Period: Employment:Finances:Education: Health/Medical Records: Substance Abuse: Criminal Records: Family/Personal Status: Community...