Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101714
Original file (ND1101714.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-ITC, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20110706
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)        19940708 - 19940718     Active:   19940719 - 19970414 HO N
                                    USN 19970415 - 20030409 HON
Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Current Enlistment: 20030410     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20080627      Highest Rank/Rate: ITC
Length of Service: Year(s) Month(s) 18 D ay(s)
 Education Level:        AFQT: 86
Fitness Reports: AVAILABLE

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      (2) (2) (2) (2) (2) CGUC (2) ACM (2) ESW S

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP :

- 20080213 :      Article 80 (Attempt s )
         Article (General A rticle, indecent assault)
         Awarded: Suspended:

S CM :    SPCM:    C C :      Retention Warning Counseling:

NDRB Documentary Review Conducted (date):        20101104
NDRB Documentary Review Docket Number:   ND10-00027
NDRB Documentary Review Findings:                 Proper as issued and that no change is warranted.
Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

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

          “CONTINUOUS HONORABLE ACTIVE SERVICE FROM 940719 UNTIL 030409 ”
         
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:                  Other Documentation:    
                  Additional Statements:
         From Applicant:           From/To Representation:           From/To Congress member:        

Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 23, effective 12 June 2008 until 9 November 2009, 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 80 and 134 .



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

Applicant’s Issues

 1.       The Applicant contends the characterization of service and reason for separation were improper and unjust as the evidence presented was contradictory and failed to meet the preponderance of the evidence standard.
2.       The Applicant contends the characterization was inequitable , because there was evidence of an unfitting condition.
Decision

Date: 20 1 2 1023             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. 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 sta ndards of equity and propriety. The Applicant’s record of service included for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 80 ( Attempts, 1 specification ) and Article 134 ( General A rticle: Indecent assault, 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 exercised rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request an administrative board .

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends the characterization of service and reason for separation were improper and unjust as the evidence presented was contradictory and failed to meet the preponderance of the evidence standard. The Manual for Courts-Martial United States, Part V, indicates the rules of evidence, other than with respect to privileges, do not apply at NJP proceedings. Therefore, preponderance of the evidence is permissible . The Applicant was ultimately found guilty at NJP for the UCMJ violations. Subsequently, the Applicant exercised his rights to provide a statement, consult with counsel, and present his case to an administrative board after being properly notified of separation proceedings. Based on the Applicant’s record of service and his testimony during the personal appearance hearing, the NDRB determined the Applicant’s misconduct did meet the preponderance of the evidence standard, and the Applicant engaged in conduct involving one or more acts or omissions that constituted a significant departure from the conduct expected of members of the Naval Service . Relief denied.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends the characterization was inequitable , because there was evidence of an unfitting condition. When reviewing a discharge, the NDRB does consider the extent to which a medical problem might affect an Applicant’s performance and ability to conform to the military’s standards of conduct and discipline. The Applicant and his counsel did submit voluminous supporting documentation describing his current diagnosis, continued medical care, and medications. T he NDRB generally does not consider the circumstances surrounding the Applicant’s stated condition or diagnosis to be of sufficient nature to excuse the Applicant’s misconduct. Specifically, the Applicant’s testimony and his past and present medical history does not demonstrate that the Applicant was not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions. The NDRB determined 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, medical and service r ecord s , testimony, and d ischarge p rocess, the Board found T herefore, 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. T he Applicant may petition the Board for Correction of Naval Records, 701 South Courthouse Road, Suite 1001, Arlington, VA 22204-2490 for further review. 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 | ND1000027

    Original file (ND1000027.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Since no other Narrative Reason for Separation could more clearly describe why the Applicant was discharged, a change would be inappropriate.Therefore, relief is 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. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301170

    Original file (ND1301170.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. The NDRB conducted a thorough review of the available records, to include significant, credible evidence submitted by the Applicant. ” 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.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700840

    Original file (ND0700840.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant claims that she lied about having a homosexual marriage because she did not want to be in California and desired to completely leave the military, so she “conjured up a story about…being in a homosexual relationship.” Separation processing is mandatory if the commanding officer believes, based on credible information, that the service member has committed homosexual conduct. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal...

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1101078

    Original file (MD1101078.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, testimony, and circumstances unique to this case, the NDRB determined that the standard of preponderance of evidence was not met at the ASB and that relief was warranted. Relief granted.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, testimony, and discharge process, the Board found the discharge was improper.Based on facts and circumstances unique...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101873

    Original file (ND1101873.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant seeks an upgrade in order to re-enlist in the U.S. Navy Reserve.2. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities. ” 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1400377

    Original file (MD1400377.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s record of service did not document if she hada pre-service drug waiver prior to entering the Marine Corpsor acknowledged complete understanding of the Marine Corps Policy Concerning Illegal Use of Drugs.When notified of administrative separation processing using the procedure for Misconduct (Drug Abuse) and Misconduct (Serious Offense), the Applicant rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and requestan administrative board.The Applicant’s...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100886

    Original file (ND1100886.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends his honorable 19 years of service outweigh his misconduct. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900178

    Original file (ND0900178.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Record of service. ” 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.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1500666

    Original file (ND1500666.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. There is no requirement or law that grants recharacterization solely on the issue of obtaining veterans benefits and this issue does not serve to...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201569

    Original file (ND1201569.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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