Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301651
Original file (ND1301651.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-AR, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20130809
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)        20040120 - 20040217     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Current Enlistment: 20040218     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20070427      Highest Rank/Rate: AN
Length of Service: Year(s) Month(s) 10 D ay(s)
 Education Level:        AFQT: 51
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 3.3 ( 3 )      Behavior: 3.0 ( 3 )        OTA: 3.27

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      (2)

Periods of C ONF :

NJP :

- 20061221 :      Article (Absence without leave , 2 specifications )
         Article (Failure to obey order or regulation , 2 specifications )
         Awarded: Suspended: Vacated 20070405

- 20070405 :      Article (Absence without leave)
         Article (Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer)
         Article 92 (Failur e to obey order or regulation)
         Awarded: Suspended:

S CM :    SPCM:    C C :

Retention Warning Counseling:

- 20061221 :      For Commanding Officer’s NJP held on 20061221 for violation of UCMJ Article 86, unauthorized absence (2 specifications) , and A rticle 92, failure to obey o rder or regulation (2 specifications)

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:                  Other Documentation:    
                  Additional Statements:
          From Applicant:           From/To Representation:           From/To Congress member:        


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

Applicant’s Issues

 1.       The Applicant contends his discharge is inconsistent with the policies of service. With the information he has researched and the details of his discharge, he contends he warrants an upgrade to Honorable.

Decision

Date: 20 1 4 0428             Location: Washington D.C .        R epresentation :

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
 By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall .
Discussion

 The Applicant was scheduled for a personal appearance hearing on 25 April 2014 but requested his hearing be closed due to his inability to obtain transportation to Washington, DC. Since the Applicant had not previously received a documentary review from the NDRB, the NDRB conducted one on 28 April 2014. The Applicant remains eligible for his personal appearance hearing within 15 years of his discharge date. 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. The 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 NAV PERS 1070/613 (Page 13) warning and for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 86 ( Absence without leave , 3 specific ation s), Article 91 ( Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer ), and Article 92 ( Failure to obey order or regulation , 3 specifications ) . Based on the offenses, command administratively processed for separation. When notified of administrative separation processing using the procedure, the Applicant waived rights to consult with a qualified counsel and submit a written statement.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his discharge is inconsistent with the policies of service. With the information he has researched and the details of his discharge, he contends he warrants an upgrade to Honorable. The NDRB agrees that the Applicant’s discharge is inconsistent with the policies of service. With the frequency and severity of his misconduct, the Applicant warranted an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge and not the more lenient General discharge. However, the NDRB is not authorized to change a discharge characterization of service to a more unfavorable level, and so the General discharge will remain unchanged. 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 .

Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 11, effective 26 April 2005 until 11 June 2008, 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 s 91 and 92 .


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 | 2011_Marine | MD1100690

    Original file (MD1100690.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. 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 governmental affairs unless there is...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801605

    Original file (ND0801605.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 conduct mitigates the reason for the characterization of discharge.The Applicant made claims of good conduct and non-involvement with civil authorities on his DD-293 application, but provided no verifiable evidence to support these claims. The Board determined the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700838

    Original file (ND0700838.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board determined that a narrative reason of “misconduct” carried a more negative connotation than “unsatisfactory performance.” Therefore, the Board determined that the Applicant was not prejudiced by this error, and concluded that a narrative reason change was not warranted.In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of Government affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant. ...

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0800388

    Original file (MD0800388.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Types of Documents SubmittedRelated to Military Service: DD 214: Service and/or Medical Record: Other Records: Related to Post-Service Period: Employment: Finances: Education/Training: Health/Medical Records: Substance Abuse: Criminal Records: Family/Personal Status: Community Service: References: Additional Statements From Applicant: From Representation: From Member of Congress: Other Documentation (Describe) DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700614

    Original file (ND0700614.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 evidence of post-service conduct was found not to mitigate the conduct which precipitated the discharge. Although not raised by the Applicant, the Board reviewed the record to determine if the reason for discharge, Misconduct – Commission of a Serious Offense, was supported by the evidence. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901683

    Original file (ND0901683.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB determined the Applicant met the requirements for separation by reason of misconduct – pattern of misconduct, and the awarded characterization of service was warranted. 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). ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0902062

    Original file (ND0902062.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. 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 previous in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member’s overall character.Summary: After a thorough...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0701271

    Original file (MD0701271.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Medical and Service Record, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found that Pertinent Regulation/Law A. Paragraph 6210, MISCONDUCT, of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16F), effective 01 Sep 2001 until Present. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing,...

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1000625

    Original file (MD1000625.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    At the administrative separation board (ASB), by a unanimous vote (3-0), they determined that the preponderance of evidence supported the act or omissions, that the Applicant should be separated from the Marine Corps and that his characterization of service should be Under Other Than Honorable Conditions. Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, medical and record entries, and discharge process, the Board found...

  • USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1300876

    Original file (MD1300876.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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