Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1300539
Original file (ND1300539.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-DC3, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20130116
Characterization of Service Received:
Narrative Reason for Discharge:
Authority for Discharge: MILPERSMAN

Applicant’s Request:      Characterization change to:      
         Narrative Reason change to:       UNABLE TO ADVANCE

Summary of Service
Prior Service:
Inactive:         US N R (DEP)        19990619 - 19990629     Active:            199 9 0630 - 20030225
                                             20030226 - 20070617
                                             20070618 - 20110519
Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20110520     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20120123      Highest Rank/Rate: DC2
Length of Service: Y ear( s ) M onth( s ) 0 4 D a y ( s )
 Education Level:        AFQT: 47
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 3.0 ( 2 )      Behavior: 1.0 ( 2 )        OTA: 2.29

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle Pistol
Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP :

- 20110908 :      Article (General Article, child endangerment)
         Awarded: Suspended:

S CM :    SPCM:    CC:      Retention Warning Counseling :

CIVIL ARREST:

- 20110824 :       Charges: The court found jurisdiction under section 300, subdivision A, of the welfare and Institutions Code, and declared all four children dependents of the San Diego County Juvenile Court. The next scheduled hearing to review SNM progress is 20120222 .

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: “ NAVY "E" RIBBON; GOOD CONDUCT MEDAL (2); NATIONAL DEFENSE SERVICE MEDAL; IRAQI CAMPAIGN MEDAL; GLOBAL WAR ON TERRORISM SERVICE MEDAL; SEA SERVICE DEPLOYMENT RIBBON; NAVY AND MARINE CORPS OVERSEAS SERVICE RIBBON; NAVY AND MARINE CORPS ACHIEVEMENT MEDAL; ENLISTED SURFACE WARFARE SPECIALIST; RIFLE MARKSMANSHIP RIBBON; PISTOL MARKSMANSHIP RIBBON ”
         “ CONTINUOUS HONORABLE ACTIVE SERVICE FROM 990630 UNTIL 110519 ”
         “ MISCONDUCT (SERIOUS OFFENSE) ”

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 36, effective 18 August 2011 until Present, 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 the administrative board considered adverse matter from a prior enlistment.
2.       The Applicant contends the administrative board provided no facts to support their findings of a “Serious Offense. ”
3 .        The Applicant contends his C onstitutional rights were violated.
4.       The Applicant contends the administrative board made unsubstantiated comments and claims in reaching their decision.
5 .        The Applicant contends the administrative board’s actions and comments were improper, inequitable, and prejudicial.
6.       The Applicant contends his characterization and narrative reason are improper and inequitable based on grave procedural errors.
Decision

Date : 20130925             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 for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article (General Article, child endangerment). Based on the offense committed by the Applicant, command administratively processed for separation . When notified of administrative separation processing using the procedure, the Applicant exercised rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request an administrative board. The Applicant was notified of separation proceedings for Misconduct (Commission of a Serious Offense) and Family Advocacy Program (FAP) Rehabilitation Failure. The administrative board voted 3-0 that the preponderance of the evidence supported that the Applicant committed misconduct (Child Abuse a nd Child Neglect) and that the Applicant was a FAP Failure. Further, the administrative board voted 3-0 to r ecommend separation with a characterization of service of General (Under Honorable Conditions).

Issues 1 -5 : (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant brought forth multiple issues concerning the propriety and equity of his administrative board and administrative separation . These issues were the same arguments addressed in his L etter of De ficiency dated 0 3 November 2011 and in his comments on his administrative board findings dated 19 January 2012. The NDRB presumes regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant. The record clearly shows th e Separati on Authority properly addressed these issues . T he Applicant provided no new evidence or documentation to the NDRB to show that he was improperly or inequitably discharge from the Navy. Based upon available records and after thoroughly reviewing the administrative board’s proceedings, the Applicant’s Letter of Deficiency, letters from his mother, and character references from his mother, father, and uncle, nothing indicates that the Applicant’s discharge was in any way inconsistent with the standards of discipline in the United States Navy. A preponderance of the evidence reviewed supports the conclusion that the Applicant committed a serious offense and was a FAP Failure , that separation from the Naval Service was appropriate, and that a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge was warranted. Relief denied.
6: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his characterization and narrative reason are improper and inequitable based on grave procedural errors. Similar to the previous issues, the record clearly shows the Separati on Authority properly addressed these issues , and the Applicant provided no new evidence or documentation to the NDRB . The Applicant was administratively separated and not separated upon expiration of enlistment or fulfillment of service obligation. The characterization of service is determined by the quality of the member’s total performance of duty and conduct during the current enlistment, including the reason for separation. Other considerations shall be given to the member’s length of service, grade, aptitude, and physical and mental condition. Based on the Applicant’s record of service in his current enlistment , the NDRB determined the Applicant’s service was honest and faithful but significant negative aspects of his conduct or performance of duty outweighed the positive aspects of his service record, and the awarded characterization of service was 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

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1000544

    Original file (MD1000544.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant contends his rights were violated, because his command’s decision to conduct NJP proceedings based solely on allegations [instead of facts]did not afford him the opportunity to consult with counsel and properly prepare a defense. He also alleges the command’s Sergeant Major advised him not to file an appeal to the NJP conducted on 20 March 2009, further contending his rights were violated and that the command acted improperly.The NDRB found evidence in the Applicant’s service...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801097

    Original file (ND0801097.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    [Extracted from CO, TRIDENT Refit Facility letter 20050624].NJP:SCM:SPCM:CC:Retention Warning Counseling:NDRB Documentary Review Conducted (date): 20070510 NDRB Documentary Review Docket Number: ND06-00888 NDRB Documentary Review Findings: NO CHANGE WARRANTED 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: Substance Abuse: Criminal...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001251

    Original file (ND1001251.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 Applicant was separated...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101304

    Original file (ND1101304.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB voted to upgrade the Applicant’s discharge to Honorable and to change the narrative reason for separation to Secretarial Authority.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, and discharge process, facts, and circumstances unique to this case,and taking into consideration his testimony,the Board found the discharge was inequitable. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100603

    Original file (ND1100603.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 | 2012_Navy | ND1200734

    Original file (ND1200734.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends his record of service outweighs his misconduct, and he was forced into accepting a General discharge.2. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901554

    Original file (ND0901554.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    However, the NDRB determined that the Applicant’s misconduct was so egregious that it warranted incarceration for 7 years and an “Under Other Than Honorable Conditions” characterization of service from the Navy. ” 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0902070

    Original file (ND0902070.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. Automatic Upgrades - There is no law or regulation that provides for an unfavorable discharge to be upgraded based solely on the passage...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901318

    Original file (MD0901318.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    ex-, USMC Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request Application Received: 20090416 Characterization of Service Received: Narrative Reason for Discharge: Authority for Discharge: MARCORSEPMAN Applicant’s Request: Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USMCR (DEP) 20040223 - 20040907 Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20040908 Age at Enlistment: Period of Current Enlistment: Years Months Date of Discharge:...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901255

    Original file (ND0901255.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years from the date of discharge. 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.