Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301900
Original file (ND1301900.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-PC2, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20130927
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)        19900220 - 19900506     Active:            19900507 - 19940420
                                             19940421 - 20000515
                                             20000516 - 20030731
                                             20030801 - 20050717

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20050718     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20061013      Highest Rank/Rate: PC1
Length of Service: Y ear( s ) M onth( s ) 26 D a y ( s )
 Education Level:        AFQT: 26
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 2.5 ( 2 )      Behavior: 2.5 ( 2 )        OTA: 2.72

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

Periods of C ONF :

NJP :

- 20060922 :      Article (Absence without leave , 9 specifications )
         Specification 1: 0800-0845, 20060807, 45 minutes
         Specification 2: 0800-0845, 20060809, 45 minutes
         Specification 3: 0800-0845, 20060810, 45 minutes
         Specification 4: 1030-1055, 2006081 1 , 25 minutes
         Specification 5: 1030-1055, 20060819, 25 minutes
         Specification 6: 0800-0845, 20060821, 45 minutes
         Specification 7: 0800-0845, 20060822, 45 minutes
         Specification 8: Failed to go to Master Chief Storekeeper’s office at 1300, 20060821
         Specification 9: 0800-1300, 20060828, 5 hours
         Article (Failure to obey order or regulation , 2 specifications )
         Article (False officials statements , 2 specifications )
         Article 132 (Frauds against the United States)
         Article (General A rticle , failure to maintain funds , 1 8 specifications )
         Specification 1 : Failure to maintain sufficient funds Check number 207 for $10.91
         Specification 2 : Failure to maintain sufficient funds Check number 208 for $55.00
         Specification 3 : Failure to maintain sufficient funds Check number 209 for $9.06
         Specification 4 : Failure to maintain sufficient funds Check number 210 for $139.80
         Specification 5 : Failure to maintain sufficient funds Check number 212 for $10.36
         Specification 6 : Failure to maintain sufficient funds Check number 213 for $40.58
         Specification 7 : Failure to maintain sufficient funds Check number 214 for $27.36
         Specification 8 : Failure to maintain sufficient funds Check number 215 for $29.03
        
         Specification 9 : Failure to maintain sufficient funds Check number 216 for $25.10
         Specification 10 : Failure to maintain sufficient funds Check number 217 for $9.19
         Specification 11 : Failure to maintain sufficient funds Check number 218 for $17.50
         Specification 12 : Failure to maintain sufficient funds Check number 219 for $8.38
         Specification 13 : Failure to maintain sufficient funds Check number 220 for $12.20
         Specification 14 : Failure to maintain sufficient funds Check number 221 for $11.00
         Specification 15 : Failure to maintain sufficient funds Check number 222 for $72.57
         Specification 16 : Failure to maintain sufficient funds Check number 223 for $9.16
         Specification 17 : Failure to maintain sufficient funds Check number 224 for $29.00
         Specification 18 : Failure to maintain sufficient funds Check Number 225 for $15.00
         Awarded : Susp ended:

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:

          Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, should read: “ NATIONAL DEFENSE SERVICE MEDAL (2), GLOBAL WAR ON TERRORISM SERVICE MEDAL, BATTLE “E” RIBBON (2), ARMED FORCES EXPEDITIONARY MEDAL, EXPERT PISTOL MEDAL, JOINT SERVICE ACHIEVEMENT MEDAL, SEA SERVICE DEPLOYMENT RIBBON, SOUTHWEST ASIA SERVICE MEDAL, LETTER OF COMMENDATION (2), LETTER OF APPRECIATION ”
         “ CONTINUOUS HONORABLE ACTIVE SERVICE FROM 900507 UNTIL 050717 ”

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 :        

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 s of the UCMJ, Article s 92, 107 , 132, and 134 .



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

Applicant’s Issues

 1.        The Applicant contends “c harges were noticed to be added for more than once for an instance of purpose ,” and he did “seek counsel and was mentioned that there were repeated charges on record. ”

Decision

Date : 20 1 4 0501             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 propriety. The Applicant’s record of service included for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 86 ( Absence without leave , 9 specifications ), Article 92 ( Failure to obey order or regulation , 2 specifications ), Article 107 (False official statements , 2 specifications), Article 132 (Frauds against the United States , 1 specification of $5 , 000.00), and Article 134 ( General A rticle, failure to maintain funds , 18 specifications totaling $531.20). Based on the offenses 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 and to submit a written statement but waived his right to request an administrative board .

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends “charges were noticed to be added for more than once for an instance of purpose,” and he did “seek counsel and was mentioned that there were repeated charges on record.” The Applicant did not specify which charges he believed were duplicates. The record of evidence clearly shows the Applicant accepted NJP and waived his rights to trial by court-martial and an administrative separation board. The Applicant was found guilty at NJP for multiple violations of the UCMJ over a period from January through September 2006. If the Applicant felt he was mistakenly charged with a crime, it was his obligation to contest those charges at the time they were made. During a trial or administrative separation board, he would have had the opportunity to mount a defense against the charges. The Applicant submitted no evidence to support his contention ; therefore, the NDRB must rely upon the presumption of regularity in the conduct of Government affairs. 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 | 2009_Marine | MD0900208

    Original file (MD0900208.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Should the Applicant feel his post service conduct becomes substantial enough to warrant a personal appearance, there are veteran’s organizations, such as the American Legion, willing to provide guidance to assist former service members in their efforts to obtain a discharge upgrade. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-01161

    Original file (ND99-01161.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Decision A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 000522. 931201: Applicant to unauthorized absence 0715, 1Dec93.931206: Applicant apprehended by civil authorities and charge with 4 counts of failure to appear (5 days).931217: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under Other Than Honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the Commission of a serious offense as evidenced by your service record and civilian conviction as evidenced by...

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1101361

    Original file (MD1101361.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 4 November 2008, the Separation Authority directed that the Applicant be separated from the Marine Corps with an Under Other Than 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 administrative separation process, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reason for separation shall...

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00734

    Original file (MD02-00734.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD02-00734 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020425, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. Specification 9: Unauthorized absence from remedial PT on 891031.Violation of UCMJ, Article 92:Specification: Derelict in duties in scoring only 45 points on a PFT on 891027.Awarded forfeiture of $391.00 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duties for 45 days, reduction to PFC. ...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-01032

    Original file (ND00-01032.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    850927: Unauthorized absence from USS INDEPENDENCE (CV62) located at PNSY, Philadelphia, PA since 1330, 85SEP27, intentions unknown. The Board after considering the applicant’s entire application and service record did not find relief warranted. The names, and votes of the members of the Board are recorded on the original of this document and may be obtained from the service records by writing to:Naval Council of Personnel Boards Attn: Naval Discharge Review Board 720 Kennon Street SE Rm...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801718

    Original file (ND0801718.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board determined the awarded discharge characterization was appropriate and an upgrade based on the fact the Applicant feels his actions were unintentional would be inappropriate.Issue 2: The Applicant is asking for help in locating a binder used by his defense attorney which documented the Applicant’s Naval service. It is recommended the Applicant contact his last command or his defense attorney for information on disposition of his binder.After a thorough review of the available...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001462

    Original file (ND1001462.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    There is no requirement, or law, that grants re-characterization of a discharge solely on the issue of making a former service member eligible to receive benefits. ” 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0601140

    Original file (ND0601140.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Medical Record Entries Related to Characterization of Service or Narrative Reason for Separation NONE Elements of Discharge: [INVOLUNTARY] Discharge Process: Date Notified:19920522Reason for Discharge due to: Least Favorable Characterization: Record Supports Narrative Reason: Date Applicant Responded to Notification: 19920524Rights Elected at Notification:Consult with Counsel Administrative Board Obtain Copies Submit Statement(s) (date)GCMCA Review Recommendation of Commanding Officer...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600214

    Original file (ND0600214.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions) and that the Narrative Reason for Separation be changed. The separation authority directed that the Applicant be discharge by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse. 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0800961

    Original file (MD0800961.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request: Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of ServicePrior Service: Inactive: USMCR (DEP) 19910628 - 19920309 Active: 19920310 - 19951212 Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 19951213Period of enlistment: Years Months Date of Discharge: 19990809Length of Service: Yrs Mths00 Dys Education Level: Age at Enlistment: AFQT: 35MOS: 7041Highest Rank: Fitness reports: Proficiency/Conduct marks (# of occasions): ()/ ()Awards and Decorations...