Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301287
Original file (ND1301287.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-FC3, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20130529
Characterization of Service Received:
Narrative Reason for Discharge:
Authority for Discharge: MILPERSMAN

Applicant’s Request:      Characterization change to:      
         Narrative Reason change to:       VARIOUS

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive:         US N R (DEP)        20050714 - 20050915     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20050916     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20071119      Highest Rank/Rate: FC3
Length of Service: Y ear( s ) M onth( s ) 04 D a y ( s )
 Education Level:        AFQT: 79
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 2 ( 1 )        Behavior: 1.5 ( 2 )        OTA: 1.92

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle

Periods of UA /C ONF :

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

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

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

          “ MILPERSMAN ”
         “ GKA ”

The NDRB will recommend to the Commander, Navy Personnel Command, PERS-312A, 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 :        




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

Applicant’s Issues

 1.       The Applicant contends there is an error in Block 26 on his DD Form 214.
2.       The Applicant contends that as an older Sailor, he strived to help those who needed friendship or didn’t fit in .
3.       The Applicant contends he never had an alcohol problem.
4.       The Applicant contends his post-service conduct is worthy of an upgrade.
Decision

Date: 20 1 3 1219             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 Board did complete a thorough review of the circumstances that led to discharge and the discharge process to ensure discharge met the pertinent sta ndards of equity and propriety. The Applicant’s record of service was incomplete. The Applicant’s record of service did contain two evaluations documenting subpar performance and conduct. 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 an administrative board or a General Court-Martial Convening Authority review . However, per the Applicant ’ s DD Form 214, the Separation Code GPD indicates the Applicant exercised his right to appear before an administrative board.

: ( Nond ecisional) The Applicant contends there is an error in Block 26 on his DD Form 214. W hile the Separation Code of GPD in Block 26 of his DD Form 214 did not match Block 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation) or Block 25 (Separation Authority) , the first letter of the code indicates the Applicant exercised his right to appear before an administrative separation board . In the absence of a complete discharge package, the Board presumed regularity of governmental affairs. As such, the Board presumed that the Applicant had a pattern of misconduct based upon the evaluations in his record of service . The Applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support his issue. Going under the assumption that he was separated for a Pattern of Misconduct, the NDRB will submit an administrative change request to change the Applicant’s Separation Code to GKA, which indicates he received an administrative separation board and was discharged for a Pattern of Misconduct. Additionally, the NDRB will request a change to the Separation Authority to MILPERSMAN 1910-140, which refers to Naval Military Personnel Manual Article 1910-140, which pertains to separation for a Pattern of Misconduct. The current Block 25 of MILPERSMAN 1910-142 refers to separation for Commission of a Serious Offense. T he NDRB can only make recommendations for administrative corrections and has no ability to track or verify whether change recommendations are completed. It is the responsibility of the former service member to follow up with Commander, Navy Personnel Command, PERS-312A to ensure changes are incorporated into the record.

Issues 2-3 : (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends that as an older Sailor, he strived to help those who needed friendship or didn’t fit in. He also contends he never had an alcohol problem. 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 not discharged for a pattern of misconduct. Although his record is incomplete, it is clear he was administratively separated for a Pattern of Misconduct and was not separated upon expiration of enlistment or fulfillment of service obligation. When separated for misconduct, 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, 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.
4 : (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his post-service conduct is worthy of an upgrade . The NDRB considers 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. The Applicant provided a personal statement, evidence of continuous employment, his Associates of Arts degree, with honors, his Phi Theta Kappa Honor Society certificate, two Certificates of Achievement from Chaffey College, three computer and networking certification certificates, a clean criminal background check, and 1 2 character references. The Applicant could have provided documentation as detailed in the Post-Service Conduct paragraph in the Addendum , however, 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. The Board determined the documentation submitted by the Applicant does not demonstrate if in-service misconduct was an aberration. The characterization of service received was appropriate considering the length of service and narrative reason for separation . 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.

Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 11, effective 26 April 2005 until 19 May 2008, 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 .


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 | 2009_Navy | ND0901514

    Original file (ND0901514.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. The Board also determined that an upgrade to Honorable is not warranted taking into consideration the frequency and seriousness of the offenses committed by the Applicant and a lack of evidence of extenuating circumstances.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, and discharge process, the Board...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101902

    Original file (ND1101902.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In fact, the CO recommended to the Separation Authority that the Applicant receive a General discharge, which is lenient as most discharges for a Pattern of Misconduct are Under Other Than Honorable Conditions. ” 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000158

    Original file (ND1000158.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 contends that...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00436

    Original file (ND02-00436.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00436 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020226, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable and the reason for the discharge be changed to administrative. No indication of appeal in the record.980730: Vacate suspended reduction to FC3 awarded at CO's NJP dated 26May98 due to continued misconduct.980731: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence 0500-0945, 28Jul98. The Applicant’s discharge...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200872

    Original file (ND1200872.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records can grant this type of narrative reason change.The NDRB determined the Applicant should not have been medically separated but was properly separated for a Pattern of Misconduct. The NDRB conducted a thorough review of the available records, to include significant, credible evidence submitted by the Applicant. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1401540

    Original file (ND1401540.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901248

    Original file (ND0901248.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant, through his counsel, requested a change on the Applicant’s DD Form 214, block 26 (separation code) and block 28 (narrative reason for separation) to support separation due to completion of his active obligated service. The Board determined this issue is without merit and 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,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100827

    Original file (ND1100827.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    It is evident that this service member should not be recommended for retention in the Naval Service … .” After considering all the available evidence regarding the Applicant’s misconduct, the Separation Authority directed that the Applicant be separated from the Navy with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge due to Pattern of Misconduct. Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries and the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0902267

    Original file (ND0902267.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant appeared before an Administrative Separation Board (ASB), who by a unanimous vote (3-0), determined that the preponderance of the evidence supported misconduct by reason of pattern of misconduct and commission of a serious offense. ” 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. If a former...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901006

    Original file (ND0901006.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Additionally, upon receipt of the Applicant’s DD Form 293, the NDRB mails an acceptance letter that includes the Information Concerning Review Procedures, which discusses the submission of additional documents in paragraph 3, Submission of Evidence, and in the last section on page 4, Information Pertaining to a Review Based Upon Post-Service Conduct.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, and discharge...