Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1401626
Original file (ND1401626.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-CE3, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20140820
Characterization of Service Received:
Narrative Reason for Discharge:
Authority for Discharge: MILPERSMAN

Applicant’s Request:     Characterization change to:     
         Narrative Reason change to:      EXPIRATION OF TERM OF SERVICE
         Reentry Code change to:

Summary of Service

Prior Service:

Inactive:        USNR (DEP)       20030925 - 20040317     Active:           20040318 - 20081115

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Current Enlistment: 20081116    Age at Enlistment:
Period of Enlistment: Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20081205     Highest Rank/Rate: CE2
Length of Service: Year(s) Month(s) 20 Day(s)
Education Level:        AFQT: 87
Evaluation Marks:        Performance: 4.0 (1)     Behavior: 1.0 (1)       OTA: 2.14

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

Periods of CONF:

NJP:

- 20040929:      Article (Absence without leave)
         Article (Failure to obey order or regulation)
         Article (Provoking speeches or gestures)
         Awarded: Suspended:

- 20080328:      Article (General article; threat, communicating)
         Awarded: Suspended:

- 20081125:      Article (Assaulting or willfully disobeying superior commissioned officer)
         Awarded: Suspended:

SCM:     SPCM:    CC:

Retention Warning Counseling:

- 20080319:      For your violation of UCMJ Article 134, Communicating threat on 22 March 2008.

- Date NFIR:     Extracted from Commanding Officer, U.S. Naval Mobile Construction Battalion ONE, Report of Administrative Separation dated 6 January 2009 for deficiencies in his conduct identified during CO’s Mast held on 29 September 2004



Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

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

         “CONTINUOUS HONORABLE ACTIVE SERVICE FROM 040318 UNTIL 081115”

The NDRB will recommend to the Commander, Navy Personnel Command, 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:                  Other Documentation:    
                  Additional Statements:
         From Applicant:           From/To Representation:           From/To Congress member:        

Pertinent Regulation/Law

A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 23, effective 20 May 2008 until 9 November 2009, 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 IV, Para 403m(7)(b), Presumption Concerning Court-Martial Specifications.


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

Applicant’s Issues

1.       The Applicant seeks a change in his discharge status in order to reenlist into the Army National Guard.
2.       The Applicant seeks an upgrade in order to qualify for G. I. Bill benefits.
3.       The Applicant contends his post-service conduct is worthy of an upgrade.
4.       (Board Issue) The Applicant’s discharge was improper because he was discharged for misconduct that occurred in a prior enlistment.

Decision

Date: 20141230            Location: Washington D.C.        Representation:

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
By a vote of
the Narrative Reason shall SECRETARIAL AUTHORITY .

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 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 NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13) warnings and for of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 86 (Absence without leave), Article 90 (Assaulting or willfully disobeying superior commissioned officer), 92 Article xx (Failure to obey order or regulation), Article 117 (Provoking speeches or gestures), and Article 134 (General article; threat, communicating). Based on the offense(s) committed by the Applicant, command administratively processed for separation. When notified of administrative separation processing using the procedure, the Applicant waived rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request a General Court-Martial Convening Authority review.

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant seeks a change in his discharge status in order to reenlist into the Army National Guard. 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.

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant seeks an upgrade in order to qualify for G. I. Bill benefits. The NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing educational opportunities. Regulations limit the NDRB’s review to a determination of the propriety and equity of the discharge. 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.

: (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 financial stability and continuous employment, a letter of support from his Congressman, and three 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. To warrant an upgrade, the Applicant’s post-service efforts need to be more encompassing. The Board determined that 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 UCMJ violations. Relief denied.

4: (Decisional) (Board Issue) () . The Applicant’s discharge was improper because he was discharged for misconduct that occurred in a prior enlistment. The NDRB considered the Applicant’s submission of documentation indicating he received a certificate of Honorable Discharge on 15 November 2008 and a re-enlistment certificate for the following day. The record shows he originally enlisted for four years with a 24 month extension for a nuclear program enlistment guarantee. The record shows he was dropped from the nuclear program and his 24 month extension was cancelled. The record next shows the Applicant subsequently extended his four year enlistment for eight months on 21 Oct 2006; thereby changing his EAS to 17 Nov 2008. The record shows the Applicant was discharged on 5 December 2008 after signing a discharge notification on 26 November 2006 for a pattern of misconduct citing the misconduct that occurred in his previous enlistment combined with his additional misconduct of 24 November 2006 and subsequent punishment at nonjudicial punishment on 25 November 2006. Due to the Applicant’s re-enlistment prior to his last nonjudicial punishment he could not have been discharged as notified for a pattern of misconduct with only one nonjudicial punishment in his current enlistment. In cases where no other reason for separation set forth in the Naval Military Personnel Manual is appropriate, but where separation of a member is considered to be in the best interest of the service, the Secretary of the Navy has the authority to direct the separation of any member prior to the expiration of their term of service. Since there is no other narrative reason for separation that accurately describes the reason the Applicant was separated, the NDRB determined the reason for the Applicant’s discharge shall change to Secretarial Authority. Partial relief granted.

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 remain and the narrative reason for separation shall change to SECRETARIAL AUTHORITY.

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 | 2010_Navy | ND1002187

    Original file (ND1002187.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/To Congress member: DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200013

    Original file (ND1200013.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. : (Non-decisional) The Applicant wants his discharge upgraded and RE Code changed so he can reenlist in the military.The NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001637

    Original file (ND1001637.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’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 .Since fifteen years have elapsed since the date of his discharge, the Applicant is not...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101165

    Original file (ND1101165.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/To Congress member: DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1400283

    Original file (ND1400283.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant seeks an upgrade and a change in his narrative reason for separation to receive educational benefits and to qualify for veteran status when applying for jobs.2. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge, or change a narrative reason for separation, for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1002294

    Original file (ND1002294.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    He could have provided documentation as specified in the Post-Service Conduct paragraph in the Addendum , however, 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. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1500205

    Original file (ND1500205.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 PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1002142

    Original file (ND1002142.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant wants his discharge upgraded so he can reenlist in the military.3. : (Non-decisional) The Applicant wants his discharge upgraded so he can reenlist in the military. ” 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 | 2011_Navy | ND1102031

    Original file (ND1102031.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant could have provided documentation as detailed in the Post-Service Conduct paragraph in the Addendum with the recognition that 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. Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1500901

    Original file (ND1500901.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. There is no requirement or law that grants recharacterization solely on the issue of obtaining veterans benefits and this issue does not serve to...