Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101807
Original file (ND1101807.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-HA, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
        
Application Received: 20110726
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)        19950215 - 19950529     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 19950530     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20000317      Highest Rank/Rate: HN
Length of Service: Y ear s M onth s 18 D a ys
Education Level:        AFQT: 41
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 2.0 ( 8 )      Behavior: 2.0 ( 8 )        OTA: 2.31

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Pistol MM GCM FMFR NDSM

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP : 1

- 20000302 :      Article 86 (Absence without leave)
         Article 91 (Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer)
         Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation)
         Awarded: RIR FOP RESTR EPD       Suspended: FOP

S CM : NONE                SPCM: NONE                C C : NONE

Retention Warning Counseling : 4

- 19970509 :       For incompetence in the performance of duties

- 19970509 :       For unsatisfactory appearance in uniform

- 19970520 :       For unauthorized absence

- 19980309:      For disrespect and unauthorized absence

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

The NDRB note
d an administrative error on the original DD Form 214:

         GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)

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 18, effective 12 December 1997 until 29 March 2000, 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 91 and 92.



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

Applicant’s Issues

1.        The Applicant contends his discharge was inequitable , because he did not perform any acts of misconduct.

Decision

Date : 20 1 2 09 06             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 discharg e 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 four NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13) warnings for disrespect, unauthorized absence, unsatisfactory appearance in uniform, and incompetence in the performance of his duties and one non-judicial punishment (NJP) for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 86 (Absence without leave) , Article 91 (Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer) , and Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation). B ased on the offenses committed by the Applicant, his command administratively processed him for separation. When notified of administrative separation processing using the notification procedure, the Applicant waived his rights to c onsult with a qualified counsel and submit a written statement . The Applicant was not entitled to an administrative board.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his discharge was inequitable , because he did not perform any acts of misconduct. The Applicant’s service record shows otherwise. It reveals that the Applicant was found guilty of violating UCMJ Articles 86, 91, and 92 at NJP on 2 March 2000. Violation of Articles 91 and 92 are considered serious offenses per the Manual for Courts-Martial and could have resulted in a punitive discharge as the result of a Special or General Court-Martial. His command, however, opted for the more lenient administrative separation. The Applicant provided no evidence to dispute his guilty findings at NJP. The NDRB determined that the Applicant’s separation was both proper and 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 | 2011_Navy | ND1100535

    Original file (ND1100535.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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801516

    Original file (MD0801516.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Types of Documents Submitted/reviewedRelated to Military Service: DD 214: Service and/or Medical Record: Other Records: Related to Post-Service Period: Employment: Finances: Education/Training: Health/Medical Records: Substance Abuse: Criminal Records: Family/Personal Status: Community Service: References: Additional Statements From Applicant: From Representation: From Member of Congress: Other Documentation (Describe): DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE...

  • USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1301372

    Original file (MD1301372.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ” 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. Additionally, the NDRB does not have the authority to change a narrative reason for separation to one indicating a medical disability or...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801343

    Original file (ND0801343.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 requirements of DoD Instruction 1332.28, you may submit a complaint in accordance with...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801969

    Original file (ND0801969.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USNR (DEP)20011031 - 20020704Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20020705Age at Enlistment:Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20041028Highest Rank/Rate:ABEANLength of Service: Years Months17 DaysEducation Level:AFQT: 70EvaluationMarks:Performance:3.0(3)Behavior:1.6(3)OTA: 2.55Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):Periods of UA/CONF:...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700667

    Original file (ND0700667.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    ex-STGSA, USN ND07-00667 Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request Application Received: 20070424 Characterization Received: OTHER THAN HONORABLE Narrative Reason: MISCONDUCT DUE TO DRUG ABUSE Authority: MILPERSMAN 3630620 Applicant’s Request: Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change: 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801320

    Original file (ND0801320.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s record of service is marred by a retention warning for failure to obey rules and regulations, a NJP for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 92 (Failure to obey a written regulation) and Article 128 (Verbal assault), and an admission of guilt for violation of Article 86 (UA) contained in the Applicant’s request for discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for...

  • USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1300076

    Original file (MD1300076.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 | 2008_Navy | ND0800643

    Original file (ND0800643.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Awarded - Susp - Types of Documents SubmittedRelated to Military Service: DD 214: Service and/or Medical Record: Other Records: Related to Post-Service Period: Employment: Finances: Education/Training: Health/Medical Records: Substance Abuse: Criminal Records: Family/Personal Status: Community Service: References: Additional Statements From Applicant: From Representation: From Member of Congress: Other Documentation (Describe) DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000469

    Original file (ND1000469.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Separation Authority further directed that the Applicant be discharged with an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions characterization of his service and that he receive an RE-4 reenlistment code (not recommended for reenlistment).The NDRB found no issue of impropriety; as such, an upgrade in characterization of service or change to the narrative reason for separation based on propriety would be inappropriate. The NDRB determined that the characterization of service at discharge was...