Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1400471
Original file (ND1400471.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-PS2, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20140124
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)        19930525 - 199300601    Active:   1993 0602 - 199 90915
                                    19990916 - 20041125

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20041126     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years 19 Extension
Date of Discharge: 20120831      Highest Rank/Rate: PS2
Length of Service: Y ear( s ) M onth( s ) 06 D a y ( s )
 Education Level:        AFQT: 44
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 3.4 ( 8 )      Behavior: 3.3 ( 8 )        OTA: 3.32

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle Pistol (2) (5) (2) (2) (3) (4) (5) NRSR N RGW (3)

Periods of C ONF : NFIR

NJP :     S CM :             CC:      Retention Warning Counseling :

SPCM:

- 20110729 :       Art icle (Larceny and wrongful appropriation , 17 specifications )
         Specification 1: Did, at or near Bremerton, Washington, on or about 20101108, steal a value of about $10 .00 , the property of Information Systems Technician Seaman G_.
         Specification 2 : Did, at or near Bremerton, Washington, on or about 20101108, steal a value of about $14 .00 , the property of Aviation Boatswain’s Mate Fuels Airman A_.
         Specification 3 : Did, at or near Bremerton, Washington, on or about 20101108, steal a value of about $11 .00 , the property of Aviation Boatswain’s Mate Equipment Airman V_.
         Specification 4 : Did, at or near Bremerton, Washington, on or about 20101108, steal a value of about $7 .00 , the property of Cryptologic Technician Third Class W_.
         Specification 5 : Did, at or near Bremerton, Washington, on or about 20101108, steal a value of about $4 .00 , the property of Information Systems Technician Seaman J_.
         Specification 6 : Did, at or near Bremerton, Washington, on or about 201011 16 , steal a value of about $5 .00 , the property of Electrician’s Mate Third Class S_.
         Specification 7 : Did, at or near Bremerton, Washington, on or about 201011 16 , steal a value of about $17.95, the property of Aviation Ordnanceman Airman Apprentice B_.
         Specification 8 : Did, at or near Bremerton, Washington, on or about 201011 16 , steal a value of about $6 .00 , the property of Logistics Specialist Seaman C_.
         Specification 9 : Did, at or near Bremerton, Washington, on or about 2010 1203 , steal a value of about $17 .00 , the property of Machinist Mate Second Class C_.
        

         Specification 1 0 : Did, at or near Bremerton, Washington, on or about 2010 1222 , steal a value of about $100 .00 , the property of Operational Specialist Seaman H_.
          Specification 1 1 : Did, at or near Bremerton, Washington, on or about 2010 1222 , steal a value of about $1 12.00 , the property of Aviation Boatswain’s Mate Handling Third Class D_.
         Specification 1 2 : Did, at or near Bremerton, Washington, on or about 2010 1223 , steal a value of about $1 0 0 .00 , the property of Electronics Technician Second Class R_.
         Specification 1 3 : Did, at or near Bremerton, Washington, on or about 2010 1223 , steal a value of about $1 55.00 , the property of Information Systems Technician Third Class F_.
         Specification 1 4 : Did, at or near Bremerton, Washington, on or about 2010 1223 , steal a value of about $ 20 0 .00 , the property of Machinist Mate Fireman Recruit D _.
          Specification 1 5 : Did, at or near Bremerton, Washington, on or about 2010 1223 , steal a value of about $ 20 0 .00 , the property of Machinist Mate Third Class G_.
         Specification 1 6 : Did, at or near Bremerton, Washington, on or about 2010 1224 , steal a value of about $1 5 0 .00 , the property of Operational Specialist Seaman H_.
         Specification 1 7 : Did, at or near Bremerton, Washington, on or about 2010 1224 , steal a value of about $1 5 0 .00 , the property of Information Systems Technician Third Class F _.
         Sentence : CONF 120 days ( BCD s uspended for a period of 12 months)

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 36, effective 18 August 2011 until Present, 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 121 .



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

Applicant’s Issues

 1.        The Applicant seeks to improve his employment opportunities.
2.       The Applicant contends his in-service conduct warrants an upgrade.
3.       The Applicant contends his family issues mitigate his misconduct.
Decision

Date : 20140702             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 Applicant’s record of service in his current enlistment included for of the UCMJ: Article 121 (Larceny and wrongful appropriation, 17 specifications). T he record indicates the Applicant was awarded a Bad Conduct Discharge , which was suspended for 12 months , and he waived his right to an administrative separation board when notified of administrative separation proceedings . A Navy Personnel Command message dated 20 August 2012 shows the Applicant ’s characterization of service was determined to be Under Other T han Honorable Conditions for Misconduct (Serious Offense) .
: (Nondecisional) The Applicant seeks to improve his employment 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.

Issues 2-3 : (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his in-service conduct warrants an upgrade. The Applicant further contends his family issues mitigate his misconduct. The Applicant received Honorable characterizations of service for his first two enlistments from June 1993 to November 2004. Each period of enlistment is an independent obligation and characterization is determined for that specific period of time. During his third enlistment, he was found guilty at a Special Court-Martial of 17 specifications of violating UCMJ Article 121 (Larceny). Due to this misconduct, th e Applicant was awarded a Bad Conduct Discharge , which was suspended for a period of 12 months . The record also shows t he Applicant was afforded mitigation for his family situation and was provided leniency through the waiving of his automatic forfeiture of pay during his period of confinement. Based on the Applicant’s record of service, the NDRB determined the Applicant engaged in conduct involving one or more acts or omissions that 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 . 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

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501362

    Original file (ND0501362.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I am asking again to please up-grade my discharge. Date of offense: 991012.000118: Applicant to pretrial confinement.000204: Charges preferred for Charge I: Violation of the UCMJ, Article 81:Specification: In that Seaman Apprentice L_ NMN B_(Applicant), U.S. Navy, Naval Station Bremerton, Bremerton, Washington, on active duty, did, at or near Naval Station Bremerton, Bremerton, Washington, on or about 6 January 2000, conspire with a unnamed person to commit an offense under the Uniform Code...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501208

    Original file (ND0501208.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION Issues, as stated Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application: “Respectfully request upgrade of discharge so the availability of the Montgomery GI Bill may be used for college in an effort of becoming a law enforcement agent.” Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01040

    Original file (ND03-01040.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-01040 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030528. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION 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 126.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500641

    Original file (ND0500641.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). Award: Restriction and extra duty for 15 days.971024: Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (Commanding Officers NJP held on 23 October 1997 for violation UCMJ Article 86 – Unauthorized absence), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.971211: NJP for...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00280

    Original file (ND01-00280.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-ABFC, USN Docket No. ND01-00280 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010109, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. Outstanding post-service conduct, to the extent that such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600217

    Original file (ND0600217.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable and the Narrative Reason for Separation be changed. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant’s DD Form 214 (Member 4) Applicant’s DD Form 214 (Member 1) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR...

  • USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1301373

    Original file (MD1301373.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Clemency denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, the record of trial by Special Court-Martial, and discharge process, the Board found that clemency was not warranted. ” 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. ...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01391

    Original file (ND03-01391.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-01391 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030820. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. In the acknowledgement letter, the Applicant was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing.

  • AF | DRB | CY2003 | FD2002-0524

    Original file (FD2002-0524.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) GRADE AFSN/SSAN pumn AMN | Q0SRSND Iie TYPE * GEN" PERSONAL APPEARANCE X RECORD REVIEW %) NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL YES MEMBERS SITTING ISSUES A92.37, A94.53, A72.01 INDEX NUMBER A67.50 ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE LETTER OF NOTIFICATION BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL’S RELEASE TO THE BOARD ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600284

    Original file (ND0600284.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged on 19941021 with a bad conduct discharge which was the sentence adjudged by a properly convened special court-martial. In response to the Applicant’s issues, with respect to a discharge adjudged by a court-martial case, the action of the NDRB is restricted to...