Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200229
Original file (ND1200229.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-STGSN, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20111108
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)        19981026 - 19990727     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Current Enlistment: 19990728     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20030625      Highest Rank/Rate: STG2
Length of Service: Year(s) Month(s) 28 D ay(s)
 Education Level:        AFQT: 81
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 3.5 ( 4 )      Behavior: 3.0 ( 4 )        OTA: 3.33

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Pistol

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP :

- 20000510 :      Article (Failure to obey order or regulation - wrongfully consuming alcohol while under the age of 21)
         Awarded: Suspended:

- 20030426 :      Article (Assault)
         Article (General A rticle - disorderly conduct - drunkenness)
         Awarded: Suspended: Suspension vacated 20030515

- 20030516 :      Article (Assaulting or willfully disobeying superior commissioned officer)
         Article (Failure to obey order or regulation)
         Awarded: Suspended:

S CM :    SPCM:    C C :

Retention Warning Counseling:

- 20000511 :      For disobeying a lawful order or regulation.

- 20030426 :      For assault - consummated by battery and disorderly conduct - drunkenness.








Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

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

          Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, should read: “ NATIONAL DEFENSE SERVICE MEDAL; SEA SERVICE DEPLOYMENT RIBBON; NAVY PISTOL EXPERT BADGE, RIFLE EXPERT BADGE ”
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), re-issued October 2002, effective 22 August 2002 until 25 April 2005, 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 90, 92 , and 128.



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

Applicant’s Issues

 1 .       The A pplicant contends his record of service prior to the misconduct warrants consideration for upgrading his discharge.
 2 .       The Applicant contends his post-service conduct warrants consideration for upgrading his discharge.
3 .       NDRB Issue: The a ssigned characteriz ation of service was improper.

Decision

Date: 20 1 2 12 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 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 NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13) warnings and non-judicial punishments for violations o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 90 ( Assaulting or willfully disobeying superior commissioned officer, 1 specification), Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation, 2 specifications), Article 128 (Assault, 1 specification), and Article 134 (Disorderly conduct, 1 specification) . Based on the offenses committed by the Applicant, command administratively processed for separation . W hen notified of administrative separation processing using the procedure, the Applicant waived rights to consult with a qualified counsel and submit a written statement .

: (Decisional) ( ) . The A pplicant contends his record of service prior to the misconduct that led to his discharge warrants consideration for upgrading his discharge. Despite the positive aspects of a service member’s record of service, certain serious offenses warrant separation from the Navy to maintain proper order and discipline. Violation of Articles 90, 92, and 128 of the UCMJ are such offenses. W illfully disobeying a superior commissioned officer , failure to obey an order or regulation, and assault usually result in an unfavorable characterization of discharge or, at a maximum, a punitive discharge and possible confinement if adjudicated and awarded as part of a sentence by a special or general court-martial. At NJP proceedings, the Applicant was found guilty of committing these offenses as well as disorderly conduct. His command , however, did not pursue a punitive discharge, but opted instead for the more lenient administrative discharge. The Board determined that relief based on this issue was not warranted. Relief denied.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his post-service conduct warrants consideration for upgrading his discharge. The NDRB considers 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. The Applicant provided a pe rsonal statement and several character references . To warrant an upgrade, the Applicant’s post-service efforts need to be more encompassing. The Applicant could have provided documentation as detailed in the Post-Service Conduct paragraph in the Addendum with the understanding that 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 establishes that the in-service misconduct was an aberration. The Board determined that the documentation submitted by the Applicant does not demonstrate if in-service misconduct was an aberration. The characterization of service received was appropriate considering the seriousness of the offense s he committed. Relief denied.

: (NDRB Issue) (Decisional) ( ) . The a ssigned characterization of service was improper. Documentation found in the Applicant’s record indicates the Applicant was informed that his discharge would be U nder Other Than Honorable C onditions. However, he was not offered an opportunity to appear before an administrative separation board. Service members recommended for administrative separation that could result in an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions characterization of service must be offered the opportunity to appear before an administrative separation board. According to documentation found in his service record, the Applicant was notified of all his rights except his right to

appear before an administrative separation board. Therefore, the least favorable characterization that he could have received was General (Under Honorable Conditions). The Applicant did commit serious offenses, which warranted separation , h owever, the awarded characterization was improper. Therefore, the NDRB determined that relief to General (Under Honorable Conditions) was warranted . Partial relief granted. Full relief to Honorable was not granted, because the Applicant had repetitive and serious misconduct that warranted separation with a General characterization of service.

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 While separation was warranted, the characterization of service was improper. Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall but t he 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

  • USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1300628

    Original file (MD1300628.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Based on a review of the Applicant’s record of service, the NDRB determined his conduct warranted an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge, however, his command leniently recommended a General discharge, which is what was eventually approved by the Separation Authority. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801337

    Original file (ND0801337.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board determined based on the limited documentation provided an upgrade would be inappropriate and the characterization of service received, “General (Under Honorable Conditions)”, was an appropriate characterization considering the time served and the UCMJ violation involved.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found ADDENDUM: Information for the...

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801201

    Original file (MD0801201.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Suspended: SCM: SPCM: CC: Retention Warning Counseling: - 19900504: For continued failure to be at section on time- 19900604: For not being at his appointed place of duty, barracks 574 working party on 19910521 - 1990109: For violation of UCMJ Article 91, disrespect to an NCO- 19920106: For continued misconduct and poor performance NDRB Documentary Review Conducted (date): 20000622 NDRB Documentary Review Docket Number: MD00-00091 NDRB Documentary Review Findings: NO CHANGE WARRANTED Types...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600602

    Original file (ND0600602.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. “ I would like to request and schedule a date and time to fly to Washington D.C. to request an discharge upgrade and convene with the Naval Council of Personnel Boards.” Documentation In addition to the service and medical records, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant’s statement, undtdApplicant’s DD Form 214...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001893

    Original file (ND1001893.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. Post-Service Conduct : The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge.

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801459

    Original file (MD0801459.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 provided additional statements and evidence of The Board determined based on the limited documentation provided an upgrade would be...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901695

    Original file (ND0901695.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 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 | ND1300852

    Original file (ND1300852.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/To Congress member: Pertinent Regulation/Law A. Relief denied.Summary:...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900578

    Original file (ND0900578.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board applauds the Applicant for his success and determined the Applicant’s post-service conduct, while not sufficient to merit an upgrade to “Honorable” is sufficient to warrant an upgrade to “General (Under Honorable Conditions)”.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found the discharge was proper and equitable at the time of discharge; however the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900958

    Original file (ND0900958.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. By a unanimous vote of 5-0, the Board determined the characterization of service received, “Under Other Than Honorable Conditions,” and the narrative reason for the discharge, “Pattern of Misconduct,” shall remain as issued based on his length of service and the UCMJ violations involved. You may view DoD Instruction 1332.28 and other Decisional Documents by going online...