Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101424
Original file (ND1101424.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-OSSA, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20110512
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)        20070327 - 20070 701     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20070 702     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20100825      Highest Rank/Rate: OS3
Length of Service: Y ear s M onth 24 D a ys
Education Level:        AFQT: 59
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 3.0 ( 5 )      Behavior: 2.4 ( 5 )        OTA: 2.63

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      (2)

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP :

- 20091203 :      Article (Failure to obey order or regulation , entrusting a motor vehicle to a person under the influence of alcohol)
         Article (General A rticle , disorderly conduct, drunkenness )
         Awarded: Suspended:

- 20100507 :      Article (Fail ure to obey order or regulation, wrongfully introducing alcohol on board a USS vessel)
         Awarded : Susp ended:

S CM :    SPCM:    C C :

Retention Warning Counseling :

- 20070824 :       For numerous negative entries on your Recruit Personnel Data Record (Hard Card) to include: difficulty passing your swimming qualification requirements as evidenced by numerous Non-Qualified Swimmer (NQS) and PRONE trainee status, and substandard performance.

         - 20091203 :       For failure to obey lawful general order by entrusting a motor vehicle to a person under the influence of alcohol and drunk and disorderly conduct, drunkenness.









Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

The NDRB did note administrative errors on the original DD Form 214:

         “ 07 JUL 02 ”
         “ 03 01 24 ”
         Block 13, Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, should read: “NATIONAL DEFENSE SERVICE MEDAL, GLOBAL WAR ON TERRORISM SERVICE MEDAL, OVERSEAS SERVICE MEDAL (2), LETTER OF APPRECI A TION ”

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 29, effective 10 November 2009 until 17 August 2011, 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 he was innocent of the violations for which he was discharged , was prevented from providing testimony on his own behalf , was not shown any evidence to demonstrate any wrongdoing, was asked to take a polygraph but was never provided the opportunity to, and should not be punished for unsupported hearsay by a guilty party . Finally, he contends that a substantive investigation was not conducted.

Decision

Date : 20 1 2 0712             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 two NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13) warnings and two non judicial punishments (NJPs) for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article (Failure to obey order or regulation, 2 specifications) and Article (General A rticle). B ased on the offenses committed by the Applicant, his c ommand administratively processed him for separation using the notification procedures . The Applicant waived his rights to c onsult with a qualified counsel and submit a written statement . The Applicant was not entitl ed to an administrative separation board, because he had less than six years of service and because he was only being recommended for a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends he was innocent of the violations for which he was discharged, was prevented from providing testimony on his own behalf, was not shown any evidence to demonstrate any wrongdoing, was asked to take a polygraph but was never provided the opportunity to, and should not be punished for unsupported hearsay by a guilty party. Finally, he contends that a substantive investigation was not conducted. T he government enjoys a presumption of regularity in the conduct of its affairs. The Applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support his issue. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the Applicant produced any evidence, to support any of his contentions. The Applicant’s statements alone do not overcome the government’s presumption of regularity in this case.

The Applicant was found guilty of multiple UCMJ violations at nonjudic ial punishment. The rules of evidence do not apply at NJP, and the commanding officer only has to find that a preponderance of the evidence shows that the Applicant committed the violations. The Applicant would have been afforded an opportunity to speak on his behalf at the NJPs. There is no requirement that a polygraph be given or that a servicemember’s request to receive one be granted. On two separate occasions, the Applicant was found guilty at NJP and thus met the requirements for separation due to Misconduct - Commission of a Serious Offense (violation of Article 92 is considered a serious offense per the Manual for Courts-Martial) and Misconduct - Pattern of Misconduct. The NDRB conducted a thorough review of the Applicant’s records and determined that his discharge was warranted, was proper, and was very equitable. It is not uncommon for misconduct of this frequency to result in an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions characterization of service. 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 | 2008_Navy | ND0801042

    Original file (ND0801042.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Considering the NJP for the Article 111 violation and the numerous civilian violations, which are considered more than minor traffic violations, the Board determined an upgrade would be inappropriate.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant Complaint Procedures : If you believe that the decision in your...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101951

    Original file (ND1101951.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 | 2013_Navy | ND1301414

    Original file (ND1301414.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 | 2013_Navy | ND1301175

    Original file (ND1301175.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends he was found guilty on the basis of hearsay evidence that would not have held up in a court-martial. Based on the offense committed by the Applicant, command administratively processed for separation. A preponderance of the evidence reviewed supports the conclusion that the Applicant committed a serious offense, that separation from the Naval Service was...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1300010

    Original file (ND1300010.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Based on the offenses committed by the Applicant, command administratively processed for separation. 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1301450

    Original file (MD1301450.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a complete review of the records and documentation submitted by the Applicant, the NDRB determined he did not present any documentation to prove the commanding officer or his Board of Inquiry disregarded relevant information or failed to comply with applicable regulations during the NJP and Board of Inquiry proceedings. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200849

    Original file (ND1200849.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. ” 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.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1300736

    Original file (ND1300736.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. ” 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.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200241

    Original file (ND1200241.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 | 2009_Navy | ND0900300

    Original file (ND0900300.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years from the date of discharge. 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 Board for Correction of Naval Records can grant this type of narrative reason change. With respect to a...