Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101554
Original file (ND1101554.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-SA, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20110608
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)        20011213 - 20020220     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20020221     Age at Enlistment: 30
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 200 4 0204      Highest Rank/Rate: SN
Length of Service: Y ear M onth s 15 D a ys
Education Level:        AFQT: 51
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 3.0 ( 1 )      Behavior: 3.0 ( 1 )        OTA: 3.00

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle MM NDSM ASR

Period of UA /CONF:       UA 20040116 - 20040119 ( 4 days )           CONF: NONE
                           UA 20030716 - 20031017 (93 days)
                           UA 20020805 - 20020809 (4 days )

NJP : 2

- 20020812 :      Article 86 (Absence without leave, UA, 4 days, 20020805 - 20020809 )
         Awarded: RIR (to E-2) RESTR EPD Suspended: RIR (suspend 6 months)

- 20031204 :      Article 86 (Absence without leave, UA, 9 3 days, 20030716 - 20031017 )
         Article 87 (Missing movement)
         Awarded : RIR (to E-2) FOP RESTR EPD Susp ended: FOP (suspend 6 months)

S CM : NONE                  SPCM: NONE        C C : NONE

Retention Warning Counseling : 1

- 20020812 :       For violation of UCMJ Article 86 (A bsence without leave ) .

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 :        


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

Applicant’s Issues

 1.        Applicant seeks a discharge upgrade to reenlist in the U.S. Armed Forces.
2.       Applicant contends he was not trained for the job specialty rating he was promised by his recruiter.
3.       Applicant contends he was not allowed to take college classes while in the Navy.
Decision

Date: 20 1 2 08 09             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 one NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13) retention warning and two nonjudicial punishments (NJPs) for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 86 (Absence without leave, UA, 2 specifications : 5-9 August 2002, 4 days ; and 16 July-17 October 2003, 9 3 days , terminated by his surrender ) and Article 87 (Missing movement). Based on the offenses committed by the Applicant, his command administratively processed him for separation. W hen notified of administrative separation processing (for C ommission of a S erious O ffense and P attern of M isconduct) using the procedure on 6 January 2004 , the Applicant waived rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request an administrative separation board . On 4 February 2004, the Applicant was separated from the Navy with an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge due to Misconduct (Pattern of Misconduct).
: (Nondecisional) The Applicant seeks a discharge upgrade to reenlist in the U.S. 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.
Issue s 2-3 : (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends he was not trained for the job specialty rating he was promised by his recruiter nor was he allowed to take college classes while in the Navy. The Applicant’s service records indicate o n 11 December 2001, the Applicant initially enlisted in the Navy under a 5 year contract with a guarantee for the C onstruction E lectrician (CE) job specialty (recruit training ship date, 20 March 2002). However, on 11 February 2002, the Applicant signed a revised enlistment contract (GTEP) that obligated him to 4 years of service with a job specialty guarantee for legal or law enforcement (recruit training ship date, 21 February 2002) , provided he served approximately 18 months aboard his first permanent duty station prior to attending job specialty training (A School). T he records indicate that the Applicant received NJP only six months into his enlistment for a four day period of UA (5-9 August 2002). Additionally, less than one year later, the Applicant went UA for 93 days until he surrendered to military authorities (16 July-17 October 2003). The Applicant was subsequently processed for administra tive separation from the Navy.

T he record clearly reflects the Applicant’s 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 he should not be held accountable for his actions. The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of service, reflects the Applicant’s willful failure to meet the requirements of conduct expected of all Sailors, regardless of his grade or length of service, and falls short of w hat is required for an upgrade in the characterization of service. Accordingly, the NDRB determined this issue did not provide a basis for which relief could be granted. 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 the administrative separation 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.

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 .


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 | ND0801327

    Original file (ND0801327.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant should be aware 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 mitigates the reason for the characterization of discharge.Besides the personal statement provided on the DD Form-293, the Applicant failed to provide any additional statements or evidence of post service accomplishments. After a thorough review of the available...

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801583

    Original file (MD0801583.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Service benefits.2. 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 previous in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member’s overall character.Beside the Applicants statement attached to the DD Form 293, he provided only service related documents as additional...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700320

    Original file (ND0700320.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Applicant’s Issues:1. 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)NONEActive: 19980305–Unable to determine? Additionally, the NDRB does not have the authority to change a narrative reason for...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700069

    Original file (MD0700069.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    20020212: Counseling: Advised of deficiencies in performance and conduct (On 20020124 you received a Summary Court-Martial for violation of articles 92x2 and 123a. (20020607) SJA review (date): (20020805)Separation Authority (date): COMMANDER, 2D MARINE AIRCRAFT WING (20020805) Basis for discharge directed: due to: Characterization directed: Date Applicant Discharged: 20020812 Additional Documents Submitted by Applicant and Considered By BoardTotal Number of Pages: 2 Related to Period of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801051

    Original file (ND0801051.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board determined clemency was not warranted and 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 case is unclear, not responsive to the issues you raised, or does not otherwise comport with the decisional document...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200119

    Original file (ND1200119.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB determined illegal use of marijuana, absence without leave, failure to obey orders, and willfully disobeying a superior commissioned officer were all conscious decisions and violated the tenets of honorable and faithful service.Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entriesand discharge process, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reason for...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1200119

    Original file (ND1200119.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB determined illegal use of marijuana, absence without leave, failure to obey orders, and willfully disobeying a superior commissioned officer were all conscious decisions and violated the tenets of honorable and faithful service.Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entriesand discharge process, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reason for...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0601010

    Original file (ND0601010.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Medical Record Entries Related To Characterization Of Service Or Narrative Reason For Separation 20020708: Naval Medical Center, San Diego. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Service Record Entries, Medical Record Entries, Elements of Discharge and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found the Applicant’s discharge proper and equitable. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100199

    Original file (ND1100199.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Regulations limit the Board’s review to a determination of the propriety and equity of the discharge.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entriesand 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. ...

  • 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...