Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200873
Original file (ND1200873.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-STGSR, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20120306
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)        20081004 - 20090727     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20090728     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20100923      Highest Rank/Rate: NFIR
Length of Service: Y ear( s ) M onth( s ) 27 D a y ( s )
 Education Level:        AFQT: 71
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 3.0 ( 1 )      Behavior: 1.0 ( 1 )        OTA: 2.00

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Pistol

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP :

- 20100831 :      Article (Failure to obey order or regulation)
         Awarded : NFIR Suspended: NFIR

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

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 29, effective 10 November 2009 until 17 August 2011, 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 92 .


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

Applicant’s Issues

 1.        The Applicant seeks an upgrade to qualify for educational benefits.
2.       The Applicant seeks a change in his Narrative Reason for Separation to qualify for service - related benefits.
3.       The Applicant seeks a change in his RE-code to reenlist into the Armed Forces.
4.       The Applicant contends h is discharge was improper , because he was not guilty of the charges against him , and he was accused and punished for actions outside of his control.
5.       The Applicant contends his discharge was improper , because he was harassed, intimidated, and coerced by members of the command into waiving his legal rights and making false self-incriminating statements.
6.       The Applicant contends his discharge was inequitable, because it was too severe and no consideration was given to his previous good record and awards.
Decision

Date: 20 1 3 0117             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 standards of equity and propriety. The Applicant’s record of service included one Evaluation Report and Coun seling Record that indicated he received for o f the Uniform Code of Mil itary Justice (UCMJ): Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation). Based on the offense committed by the Applicant, command administratively processed for separation. The Applicant’s administrative separation processing documentation was not found in the service record and so the NDRB was unable to determine if he waived or elected his rights to consult with a qualified counsel and submit a written statement . He was not eligible for an administrative board .

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant seeks an upgrade to qualify for educational benefits. 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.

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant seeks a change in his Narrative Reason for Separation to qualify for service - related 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 or change to the Narrative Reason for Separation 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.
: (Nondecisional) The Applicant seeks a change in his RE-code to reenlist into the Armed Forces. 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 B oard 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.





4 : (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his discharge was improper , because he was not guilty of the char ges against him , and he was accused and punished for actions outside of his control. The record of evidence shows the Applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment instead of exercising his right 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. During a trial, he would have had the opportunity to mount a defense against the charges. The Applicant submitted no evidence to support his contention s, therefore, the NDRB must rely upon the presumption of regularity in the conduct of Government affairs. Relief denied.

5: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his discharge was improper , because he was harassed, intimidated, and coerced by members of the command into waiving his legal rights and making false self-incriminating statements. The NDRB is not an investigative body and allegations of legal impropriety should be made to the Naval Inspector General’s Office. 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 sup port his contention s . The Applicant’s statements alone do not overcome the government’s presumption of regularity in this case. The NDRB determined his discharge was proper and equitable. Relief denied.

Issue 6: (Decisional) (Equity) RELIEF NOT WARRANTED. The Applicant contends his discharge was inequitable, because it was too severe and no consideration was given to his previous good record and awards. Despite a servicemember’s prior record of service, certain serious offenses, even though isolated, warrant separation from the to maintain proper order and discipline. Violation of Article 92 is one such offense that warrants processing for administrative separation regardless of grade, performance, or time in service. This usually results 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. The Applicant was found guilty of violation of Article 92. However, his command did not pursue a punitive discharge but opted instead for the more lenient administrative discharge. The NDRB found the characterization of the Applicant’s discharge was equitable and consistent with the characterization of discharge given others in similar circumstances. 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

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901025

    Original file (MD0901025.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 Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall remain Under Other Than Honorable Conditions, and the narrative reason for separation shall remain Commission of a...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200801

    Original file (ND1200801.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Commander, Navy Personnel Command reviewed the Applicant’s record of service and ordered the Applicant to be discharged Under Other Than Honorable Conditions for Misconduct (Serious Offense). The NDRB is not authorized to make a discharge characterization of service more unfavorable and so determined the Under Other Than Honorable Conditions was equitable and does not warrant an upgrade based upon his violation of UCMJ Articles 107, 112a, and 121. ” Additional Reviews : After a document...

  • USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201892

    Original file (MD1201892.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.

  • USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1500686

    Original file (MD1500686.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Issue 4: (Decisional) (Propriety) RELIEF NOT WARRANTED. 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 remain GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS) and the narrative reason for separation shall remain UNACCEPTABLE CONDUCT. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000475

    Original file (ND1000475.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.Nondecisional issues: The Applicant seeks clemency in the form of an upgrade to a General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization of his service at discharge in order to be eligible to receive Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) medical benefits for himself and his family. On 29 March 1995, the Navy and Marine Corps Appellate Leave Activity ordered the Bad Conduct...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700273

    Original file (ND0700273.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The record clearly indicates that the Applicant was afforded his NJP appeal rights, but did not take that opportunity to challenge the NJP. The Board found that this issue was directly contradicted by the Applicant’s own statement, indicated on his separation physical, that he did not use alcohol. 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 by the Applicant,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1500749

    Original file (ND1500749.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. Summary: After a...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001974

    Original file (ND1001974.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant seeks a change in his RE code to re-enlist in the armed forces.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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1500201

    Original file (ND1500201.rtf) Auto-classification: 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 remain UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS and the narrative reason for separation shall remain MISCONDUCT (DRUG ABUSE). ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1400283

    Original file (ND1400283.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant seeks an upgrade and a change in his narrative reason for separation to receive educational benefits and to qualify for veteran status when applying for jobs.2. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge, or change a narrative reason for separation, 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...