Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301543
Original file (ND1301543.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-DCFR, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20130710
Characterization of Service Received:
Narrative Reason for Discharge: SUFFICIENT SERVICE FOR RETIREMENT
Authority for Discharge: MILPERSMAN 1830-040 [TRANSFER TO FLEET RESERVE AND RELEASE
FROM ACTIVE DUTY]

 Applicant’s Request:      Characterization change to:      
         Narrative Reason change to:      
        
Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive:         US N R (DEP)        19870825 - 19880613     Active:   198 81012 - 19920806
                  198 80728 - 19881011 COG            19920807 - 19960314
                                    1996031 5 - 20000217
                                    20000218 - 20030529

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20030530     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20100131      Highest Rank/Rate: DC1
Length of Service: Y ear( s ) M onth( s ) 02 D a y ( s )
 Education Level:        AFQT: 60
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 4.0 ( 5 )      Behavior: 3.6 ( 5 )        OTA: 3.72

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle Pistol (2) CGUC (2) (5) (3) NEM SWASM (5)

Periods of C ONF : 20090303-20091002

NJP :     S CM :             CC:

SPCM:

- 20090303 :       Art icle (Making, drawing, or uttering check, draft, or order without sufficient funds)
         Sentence : 270 days ; BCD was disapproved due to pretrial agreement

Retention Warning Counseling :

- 20070112 :       For your financial situation, to include rental and payday loans late payments.

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 his plea agreement included retirement with benefits, but he has been unable to receive Department of Veterans Affairs ( VA ) benefits.
2 .       The Applicant contends his misconduct was an isolated incident in 21 years of service with no other adverse action .
 3 .       The Applicant contends he paid back all the debt within two years of his discharge.

Decision

Date : 20140212             Location: Washington D.C .        R epresentation :

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
 By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall SUFFICIENT SERVICE FOR RETIREMENT .

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 in his current enlistment included NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13) warning and for of the UCMJ: Art icle (Making, drawing, or uttering check, draft, or order without sufficient funds). T he Applicant pled guilty at a Special Court-Martial to violating Article 123a and was sentenced to be confined for 270 days, be reduced to E-1, and be discharged with a Bad Conduct Discharge (BCD). The BCD , however, was disapproved due to the Applicant’s pretrial agreement. On 02 September 2009, the Applicant requested that the administrative separation process be waived in order to be allowed to transfer to the Fleet Reserve / Retired Reserve . The Secretary of the Navy approved this request, and the Applicant was discharged Under Other Than Honorable Conditions for Sufficient Service for Retirement.

: ( D ecisional) (Propriety) RELIEF NOT WARRANTED. The Applicant contends his plea agreement included retirement with benefits, but he has been unable to receive VA benefits. The Applicant’s plea agreement granted his retirement with U.S. Navy benefits. U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs benefits, however, are separate and distinct from a U.S. Navy retirement pension. The VA determines eligibility for post-service benefits, not the NDRB or the Navy . 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. Relief denied.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his misconduct was an isolated incident in 21 years of service with no other adverse action. The Applicant received Honorable discharges for his first four enlistments from October 1988 to May 2003. This honorable service is reflected in Block 18 of his DD Form 214. Each period of enlistment, however, is an independent obligation and characterization is determined for that specific period of time. During his fifth enlistment, he received a retention warning and was convicted at a Special Court-Martial after he pled guilty to writing 49 bad checks totaling over $24,000. Though he was granted sufficient service to retire by the Secretary of the Navy, the NDRB determined his misconduct in his fifth enlistment constituted a significant departure from the conduct expected of members of the Naval Service, and the awarded characterization of service was warranted. Relief denied.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends he paid back all the debt within two years of his discharge. Although the NDRB commends the Applicant for paying restitution, it does not diminish his in-service misconduct. The NDRB determined the Applicant’s misconduct constituted a significant departure from the conduct expected of members of the Naval Service, 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 SUFFICIENT SERVICE FOR RETIREMENT . 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 29, effective 10 November 2009 until Present, Article 1 830-040, TRANSFER TO FLEET RESERVE AND RELEASE FROM AC TIVE DUTY.
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 | 2010_Navy | ND1000508

    Original file (ND1000508.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant desires his reenlistment code to be changed to RE-2 (not recommended for reenlistment due to retirement.)2. Representation: By a vote of the Characterization shall .By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall SUFFICIENT SERVICE FOR RETIREMENT.Discussion The NDRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge, is authorized to...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900083

    Original file (ND0900083.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The characterization of service received, “Under Other Than Honorable Conditions”, was an appropriate characterization 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, the Board found ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant Complaint Procedures : If you believe that the decision in your case is unclear, not responsive to the issues...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200559

    Original file (ND1200559.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 8 December 2009, an Administrative Separation Board (ASB) found by a vote of 3-0 that the preponderance of the evidence did support a finding of misconduct under Naval Military Personnel Manual (MILPERSMAN) Article 1910-146 (Separation by Reason of Misconduct - Drug Abuse) and voted 3-0 to recommend separation Under Other Than Honorable Conditionsand voted 3-0 to recommend a retirement grade reduction to E-8. Relief granted.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to...

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1100750

    Original file (MD1100750.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 | 2010_Marine | MD1001946

    Original file (MD1001946.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB determined the Applicant did not provide sufficient post-service documentary evidence to form a basis of relief. Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, the verbatim record of trial, and the discharge process, the NDRB determined that Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall BAD CONDUCT DISCHARGE and the narrative reason for separation shall remain . ” Additional Reviews : After a...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700871

    Original file (ND0700871.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Although the record does not contain a copy of the Applicant’s request for discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial, it was referenced in the Separation Authority’s action and the Board found sufficient evidence in the record to conclude that the reason for discharge was factually based. After a complete review of the entire record, including the evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board determined that the discharge was appropriate and that the Applicant has not provided sufficient...

  • USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1300077

    Original file (MD1300077.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant a pre-service drug waiver for using marijuana prior to entering the Marine Corps, acknowledged complete understanding of the Marine Corps Policy Concerning Illegal Use of Drugs on 26 June 2008.Based on the drug policy violation, processing for administrative separation is mandatory.The Applicant signed a pre-trial agreement to plead guilty at non-judicial punishment or Summary Court-Martial for the Article 92 violations, provided the Convening Authority withdraw the charges and...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900326

    Original file (MD0900326.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB is not authorized to consider the Applicant’s upgrade request based on this Issue.The Applicant was referred to a SPCM and the NDRB determined the awarded discharge was appropriate and an upgrade would be inappropriate. The record shows the command acted within regulations and the specifics of the Applicant’s plea agreement; an upgrade would be inappropriate.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record, Discharge Process...

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0601044

    Original file (MD0601044.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ex-LCPL, USMCMD06-01044Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request: Application Received: 20060804Narrative Reason for Separation: COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE/WAIVED BOARD Character of Service:Discharge Authority: MARCORSEPMAN 6210.6Last Duty Assignment/Command at Discharge: 8THESBN 2DFSSGApplicant’s Request:Narrative Reason change to: NONEREQUESTEDCharacterization change to:Review Requested:Representation: Decision: Date of Decision: 20070614Location of Board: Washington D.C.Complete...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700904

    Original file (MD0700904.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Although not an excuse for misconduct, the NDRB noted that there was an inequity in the Applicant’s discharge action in that the punishment was too severe for the misconduct. ” 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. With respect to a discharge adjudged by a court-martial, the action of the NDRB is restricted to upgrades...