Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200769
Original file (ND1200769.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-SR, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20120217
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)        19980522 - 19981026     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 19981027     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 19990709      Highest Rank/Rate: SR
Length of Service: Y ear( s ) M onth( s ) 13 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 62
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: Not Observed         Behavior: 1.0 ( 1 )        OTA: 1.00

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      NONE

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP :

- 19990528 :      Article ( False or unauthorized pass offenses )
         Awarded: Suspended:

S CM :    SPCM:    C C :

Retention Warning Counseling :

- 19981118 :       For failure to disclose pre-service civil involvement. [Extracted from Commanding Officer’s letter dated 19990624.]

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

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

        
MISCONDUCT

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 134 .



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

Applicant’s Issues

1.        The Applicant contends he was discharged due to personal feelings held by his commanding officer ( CO ) .
2.       The Applicant contends he is innocent.

Decision

Date: 20 1 3 0124             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 NAVP ERS 1070/613 (Page 13) warning and for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article (False or unauthorized pass offenses) . Based on the offense committed by the Applicant, command administratively processed for separation. The NDRB did not have the Applicant’s complete administrative separation package to determine whether or not the Applicant waived rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request a General Court-Martial Convening Authority review .

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends he was discharged due to personal feelings held by his CO. In addition, the Applicant contends he was told by his Executive Officer that his CO wanted him out and to report to morning muster and physical training late a couple of times so they would have a reason to let him out for disobeying a direct order without having a dishonorable discharge. The government enjoys a presumption of regularity in the conduct of its affairs. The Applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support his issue. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the Applicant produced any evidence, to support the contention that he was told to intentionally commit misconduct to be discharged or that his CO wanted him out of the Navy. What is clear from the record is that the Applicant was found guilty at NJP of violating UCMJ Article 134, which is considered a serious offense and warrants a punitive discharge (i.e., Bad Conduct or Dishonorable) as the result of a Special or General Court-Martial. However, his command opted for the more lenient administrative discharge and the lenient characterization of General (Under Honorable Conditions) . The Applicant’s statements alone do not overcome the government’s presumption of regularity in this case. Relief denied.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends he is innocent. The record of evidence clearly shows the Applicant waived his rights to trial by court-martial. If the Applicant felt he was mistakenly charged with a crime, it was his obligation to contest those charges at the time they were made at either NJP or at a trial . During NJP or a trial, he would have had the opportunity to mount a defense against the charges. The Applicant submitted no evidence to support his contention, therefore, the NDRB must rely upon the presumption of regularity in the conduct of Government affairs. 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 | ND1100736

    Original file (ND1100736.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: DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100609

    Original file (ND1100609.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In the Applicant’s case, the documentation within the service records (to include 16 signed statements from members within the command) indicated that the Applicant’s CO did conduct a fact finding inquiry. However, based on the Applicant’s service records (no evaluation reports to indicate substandard performance or behavior and the lack of any misconduct or disciplinary action)and due to the apparent lack of aggravating factors that would warrant an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301237

    Original file (ND1301237 .rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 conduct of governmental affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900736

    Original file (ND0900736.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board voted unanimously to upgrade the discharge characterization to General (Under Honorable Conditions), but not change the narrative reason for separation.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 the discharge was proper and equitable at the time of discharge. However, based on equitable grounds, the awarded characterization of service shall GENERAL (UNDER...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900938

    Original file (MD0900938.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, service record entries, discharge process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000488

    Original file (ND1000488.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Regulations limit the NDRB’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 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, former members are eligible for a personal appearance...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901238

    Original file (ND0901238.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service:Inactive: USN (DEP) 20050920 - 20051024 Active: 20051025 - 20071108 HON Period of Service Under Review:Date of Appointment : 20071109Age: 25Years Contracted: Indefinite Date of Discharge: 20090331 Highest Rank : ENSLength of Service: 01 Year(s) 04Month(s) 22 Day(s) Education Level: BS Officer’s Fitness reports: Not Available Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):Rifle Pistol Periods of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200941

    Original file (ND1200941.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests a change to his narrative reason for discharge from Misconduct to Administrative Separation. In the documentation that was sent to the Separation Authority for a decision on the characterization of service and narrative reason for discharge, the Applicant’s CO recommended that the Applicant be separated with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge for Personality Disorder. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200051

    Original file (ND1200051.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant seeks an upgrade to receive G.I. The NDRB determined that his command gave the Applicant multiple opportunities to correct his behavior, ensured he received alcohol rehabilitation treatment, processed him for administrative separation instead of pursuing a punitive discharge that could have resulted in confinement and a Bad Conduct Discharge, and ultimately...

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1100849

    Original file (MD1100849.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In the CO’s administrative separation recommendation to the Commanding General (CG), 1st Combat Logistics Group (CLG), he recommended that the Applicant be administratively separated with an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions characterization of service due to Misconduct - Drug Abuse. Based upon the evidence of record, the NDRB found no improprieties or inequities in the Applicant’s discharge processing.Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include...