Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301160
Original file (ND1301160.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-CSSR, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20130424
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)        20080610 - 20090809     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20090810     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20130325      Highest Rank/Rate: CSSN
Length of Service: Y ear( s ) M onth( s ) 16 D a y ( s )
 Education Level:        AFQT: 39
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 3.0 ( 3 )      Behavior: 1.7 ( 3 )        OTA: 2.67

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle Pistol SSDR

Periods of UA /C ONF : UA : 20120516 - 20120519 ( 3 days ) / CONF:

NJP :

- 20120117 :      Article (Absence without leave)
         Awarded: Suspended: Suspension vacated 20120531 [Extracted from Report and Disposition of Offenses, NAVPERS 1626/7 submitted by the applicant.]

- 20120531 :      Article (Absence without leave , 20120516 to 20120519 )
         Awarded: Suspended: [ Extracted from Report and Disposition of Offenses, NAVPERS 1626/7 submitted by the applicant.]

- 20121004 :      Article (Failure to obey order or regulation - dereliction in performance of dutie s)
         Awarded : Susp ended:

S CM :    SPCM:    C C :

Retention Warning Counseling :

- 20110901 :       For making, drawing, or uttering check, draft, or order without sufficient funds and failure to obey order or regulations. You consistently need financial assistance due to overspending and falling behind on various bills. You did not pay the first month ’ s rent and discuss with base housing to set up a payment plan for the amount owed of $1783.00. You did not make a payment to your rental company, resulting in all of your furniture being repossessed. Also, the command has been notified that you have not been observing necessary safety precautions when traveling with your child by not having him properly buckled in a secure car seat, as required.




- 20120118 :       For absence without leave, failure to pay debts , and you were stopped by JBPHH polic e while driving with an unlicensed vehicle. Additionally, you were operating the vehicle without a current driver’s license, current insurance , or a valid and current safety inspection. These actions are contrary to good order and discipline and against the laws of the state of Hawaii.

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 Present, Article 1910-140, SEPARATION BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT - PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT.

 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 .


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

Applicant’s Issues

 1.        The Applicant contends his discharge was inequitable , because he had been excused from his duties by his officer - in-charge when he was given NJP for dereliction of dut y .
2.       The Applicant contends he was diagnosed with sleep apnea , which may have been an underlying cause of him sleeping at work and warrants consideration for an upgrade.

Decision

Date : 20 1 3 0109             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. 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 proprie ty. The Applicant’s record of service included NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13) warnings and for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 86 ( Absence without leave , 2 specifications ) and Article 92 ( Failure to obey order or regulation , dereliction in performance of duties). Based on the offenses committed by the Applicant, command administratively processed for separation. The NDRB did not have the Applicant’s 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 his discharge was inequitable, because he had been excused from his duties by his officer-in-charge when he was given NJP for dereliction of duty. The Applicant was found guilty at NJP on 4 October 2012 for violation of Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation , dereliction in performance of duties). The Applicant submitted a written statement from a LTJG in which the LTJG writes that he excused the Applicant from his duties on 24 September 2012 and ordered the Applicant to report to medical. There is nothing in the letter about giving him permission to sleep. The statement is dated 11 December 2012, and addressed to Commander , Naval Surface Group MIDPAC, via Commander , Destroyer Squadron 31. The NDRB determined the Applicant’s command had knowledge of the statement and took the information into account prior to administratively separating the Applicant on 25 March 2013. The Applicant’s record of frequent misconduct supports an administrative separation for a P attern of M isconduct, even after consideration of the L T JG ’s statement . Relief denied.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends he was diagnosed with sleep apnea, which may have been an underlying cause of him sleeping at work and warrants consideration for an upgrade. The Applicant submitted a post-service sleep study that concluded the Applicant has mild obstructive sleep apnea. W hen reviewing a discharge, the NDRB does consider the extent to which a medical problem might affect an Applicant’s performance and ability to conform to the military’s standards of conduct and discipline. However, the NDRB does not consider the circumstances surrounding the Applicant’s stated condition or diagnosis to be of sufficient nature to excuse the Applicant’s misconduct , which included failure to return from leave for three days, failure to pay just debts and uttering bad checks, driving an unlicensed vehicle, driving without a current driver’s license, driving without current vehicle insurance or current safety inspection, and failing to properly secure child safety seat in vehicle while traveling with his young child . There is nothing in the record nor did the Applicant provide any documentation to show that he was either not responsible for his actions or should not be held accountable for his misconduct. The NDRB determined his discharge was warranted, proper, and equitable. 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 | 2012_Marine | MD1201310

    Original file (MD1201310.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. 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. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100034

    Original file (ND1100034.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a thorough review of the Applicant’s service record, the NDRB is convinced his command considered his decision to turn himself in to authorities and determined that the General discharge was warranted and was in keeping with the type of discharge given to others with similar misconduct. 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 | 2014_Navy | ND1400586

    Original file (ND1400586.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends he served almost 95 percent of his enlistment.2. ” 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. There is no requirement or law that grants recharacterization solely on...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1401742

    Original file (ND1401742.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 HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL) and the narrative reason for separation shall remain MISCONDUCT (OTHER). ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is...

  • USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1200928

    Original file (MD1200928.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 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. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901454

    Original file (ND0901454.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On page 4, Item 8, in the instructions for completion of DD Form 293, the Applicant is notified to submit evidence "which substantiate or relate directly to your issues in Item 6" (Issues: Why an upgrade or change is requested and justification for the request). However, even if the Applicant could have produced additional evidence to support a review based on his post-service conduct, the Applicant must have a full understanding that post-service conduct alone does not guarantee an...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00616

    Original file (ND01-00616.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    No indication of appeal in the record.910112: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Absent without authority. After a thorough review of the records, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper and equitable (D and E).In response to the applicant’s issue, the Board determined that the applicant demonstrated a definite pattern of misconduct by receiving 6 NJP’s in two years. At this time the applicant has not provided sufficient documentation...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201913

    Original file (ND1201913.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 qualify for the G.I. 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 reason for separation shall remain .The Applicant remains eligible for a...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801042

    Original file (ND0801042.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Considering the NJP for the Article 111 violation and the numerous civilian violations, which are considered more than minor traffic violations, 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 Entries, 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201025

    Original file (ND1201025.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Based upon the evidence of record, the NDRB found no improprieties or inequities in the Applicant’s discharge processing.As for his in-service conduct, 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. Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, medical and service record entries, and...