Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200571
Original file (ND1200571.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-FR, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20120118
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)        20010226 - 20010318     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Current Enlistment: 20010319     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20030204      Highest Rank/Rate: FR
Length of Service: Year(s) Month(s) 16 D ay(s)
 Education Level:        AFQT: 66
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 3.0 ( 1 )      Behavior: 2.0 ( 1 )        OTA: 2.50

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):     

Periods of UA : 20010712-20010831 ( 50 days ) , 20020607-20020701 ( 25 days ) , 20020916-20021123 ( 69 days )

Time Lost (per DD 214): 20021218-20030111, 24 days

NJP :

- 20010904 :      Article (Absence without leave)
         Awarded: ORAL Suspended:

- 20020719 :      Article (Absence without leave)
          Article (Missing movement)
         Awarded: CCU Suspended:

S CM :

- 20021218 :      Article (Absence without leave, 2 specifications )
         Specification 1: 20020917-20020925, 8 days
         Specification 2: 20020925-20021124 , 60 days
         Article (Missing movement on 20020917 )
          Sentence: 27 DAYS (20021202-20021229, 27 days)

SPCM:    C C :

Retention Warning Counseling:

- 20011017 :      For unauthorized absence.

- 20020719 :      For absence without leave and missing movement.


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 86 (UA greater than 30 days) and 87 (Missing movement) .



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

Applicant’s Issues

 1.       The Applicant wants his discharge upgraded so he can redeem himself and reenlist .
2 .       The Applicant contends his post-service conduct warrants consideration for upgrading his discharge.
Decision

Date: 20 130103             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 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 86 ( Absence without leave, 2 specification s ) and Article 87 ( Missing movement, 1 specification) . His record of service also included one summary court-martial for violations o f the UCMJ: Article 86 ( Absence without leave, 2 specifications) and Article 87 (Missing movement, 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 waived rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request an administrative board .

: (Non-decisional) The Applicant wants his discharge upgraded so he can redeem himself and reenlist. The NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the purpose of redeeming himself. Also, 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 Board 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. Regulations limit the Board’s review to the propriety and equity of the discharge.
: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his post-service conduct warrants consideration for upgrading his discharge. The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the re-characterization of a discharge. However, there is no law, or regulation, that provides that an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in civilian life subsequent to leaving the service. Normally, to permit relief, a procedural impropriety or inequity must have been found to exist during the period of enlistment in question. T he Applicant provided a personal statement where he indicates he is employed, has received employment awards, is attending college, is and married. He did not provide any documentation to support his claims. The Applicant could have provided documentation as detailed in the Post-Service Conduct paragraph in the Addendum with the recognition 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. T he Board determined that relief based on this issue was not warranted. 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 | 2010_Navy | ND1001790

    Original file (ND1001790.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)20001229 - 20010612Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20010613Age at Enlistment:Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20030223Highest Rank/Rate:MSSNLength of Service: YearMonths11 DaysEducation Level:AFQT: 36EvaluationMarks:Performance:NFIRBehavior:NFIROTA: NFIRAwards and Decorations (per DD 214):NJP:NONESCM:-...

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801355

    Original file (MD0801355.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board determined an upgrade would be inappropriate at this time.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 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901669

    Original file (ND0901669.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Based on the Applicant’s record of service, testimony, and insufficient post-service documentation, the NDRB determined an upgrade would be inappropriate.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 been conducted,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800677

    Original file (ND0800677.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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0601200

    Original file (ND0601200.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Elements of Discharge: [INVOLUNTARY] Discharge Process: Date Notified:20030109Reason for Discharge due to: Least Favorable Characterization Authorized: Date Applicant Responded to Notification: 20030119Rights Elected at Notification:Consult with Counsel Administrative Board Obtain Copies Submit Statement(s) (date)GCMCA Review Commanding Officer Recommendation (date): (20030102)Separation Authority (date):COMNAVAIRLANT NORFOLK VA (20030313)Narrative reason directed:Characterization...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1300379

    Original file (ND1300379.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant wants to reenlist in the Navy. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200628

    Original file (ND1200628.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Based upon the Applicant’s misconduct during his less than two years in the Navy, the NDRB determined his discharge was proper and equitable.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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801486

    Original file (MD0801486.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant contends his discharge should be upgraded based on his record of service which was good apart from a single period of misconduct. 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, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found Pertinent Regulation/Law A. Paragraph 6210, MISCONDUCT of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO...

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0601047

    Original file (MD0601047.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Elements of Discharge: [INVOLUNTARY] Discharge Process: Date Notified:20020410Basis for Discharge: MISCONDUCT, COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSELeast Favorable Characterization: UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS Commanding Officer’s Intended Recommendation: Record Supports Narrative Reason: YESDate Applicant Responded to Notification: 20020411Rights Elected at Notification:Consult with Counsel Administrative Board Obtain Copies Submit Statement(s) (date)Recommendation of Commanding Officer...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100229

    Original file (ND1100229.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/ToCongress member: Pertinent Regulation/Law A. The NDRB is authorized to...