ex-YNSN, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request


Applicant’s Request:     Characterization change to:      HONORABLE
         Narrative Reason change to:      NONE REQUESTED
        

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive:        USNR (DEP)       20070221 - 20070910 COG         Active:  NONE

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Current Enlistment: 20070911    Age at Enlistment: 18
Period of Enlistment: 4 Years 6 MONTHS Extension
Date of Discharge: 20110511     Highest Rank/Rate: YN3
Length of Service: 03 Year(s) 08 Month(s) 01 Day(s)
Education Level: 12     AFQT: 48
Evaluation Marks:        Performance: 3.3 (6)     Behavior: 2.6 (6)       OTA: 3.10

Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):     NDSM GWOTSM

Periods of UA/CONF: NONE

NJP: 2

- 20110215:      Article 91 (Insubordinate conduct toward WO, NCO or PO: Onboard USS HALYBURTON (FFG20) at sea, SNM was disrespectful to a PO1 who was in execution of his duties by saying to him ”Either hand me a cover or write me up” or words to that effect.)
         Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation; Onboard USS HALYBURTON (FFG20), SNM failed to obey a lawful order by using an unauthorized website to defeat the proxy server and gain access to an unauthorized website.)
         Article 107 (False official statement; Onboard USS HALYBURTON (FFG20) at sea, SNM with intent to deceive made a statement that he only used Facebook for pictures which was false as he also used the site to chat.)
         Awarded: RESTR EPD RIR Suspended: NONE

- 20110419:      Article 91 (Insubordinate conduct toward WO, NCO or PO; O/A 20110327 onboard USS HALYBURTON at sea, SNM was disrespectful in language to a PO2.)
         Awarded: RESTR EPD Suspended: NONE
         [Provided to NDRB by USS HALYBURTON (FFG20) with Administrative Separation package on 20120227]

SCM: NONE                 SPCM: NONE                CC: NONE

Retention Warning Counseling: 1

- 20110315:      For violation of Articles 91, 92, and 107


NDRB Documentary Review Conducted (date): 20130129      
NDRB Documentary Review Docket Number:   ND12-00733
NDRB Documentary Review Findings:                 Proper as issued and that no change is warranted.

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

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

Block 13, Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, should read: “NATIONAL DEFENSE SERVICE MEDAL; GLOBAL WAR ON TERRORISM SERVICE MEDAL; NAVY MARINE CORPS ACHIEVEMENT MEDAL”
Block 28, Narrative Reason for Separation, should read: Block 28, “UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL)”

The NDRB will recommend to the Commander, Navy Personnel Command, that the DD 214 be corrected as appropriate.
         Block 24, Character of Service, should read: “UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL)”
         Block 25, Separation Authority, should read: “MILPERSMAN 1910-140”
         Block 28, Narrative Reason for Separation, should read: “PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT”
        
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 29, effective 10 November 2009 until Present, 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.


A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 29, effective 10 November 2009 until Present, 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 is requesting an upgrade to improve his employment options.
2.       The Applicant is requesting an upgrade for VA benefits.
3. During the hearing, the Applicant stated that his discharge characterization did not properly describe his period of service.
1.       Nondecisional issues (e.g., reenlistment, employment, education) [Use short phrases] (e.g., Wants to reenlist in the Navy/National Guard. Wants to use the GI Bill money to attend college. )
2.       Decisional issues (e.g., Isolated incident, record of service, post-service conduct)
The Applicant did not state any issues.

Decision

Date: 20150612   PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING Location: Washington D.C.   Representation: Other

By a vote of 5-0 the Characterization shall remain GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS) .
By a vote of 5-0 the Narrative Reason shall remain MISCONDUCT - PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT .

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 completed a thorough review of the circumstances that led to the discharge and the discharge process to ensure his discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety. The Applicant’s record of service included one NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13) warnings, two nonjudicial punishments (NJPs) for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 91 (Insubordinate conduct toward WO, NCO or PO), Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation), and Article 107 (False official statement). Based on the offenses committed by the Applicant, his command administratively processed him for separation. When notified of administrative separation processing using the notification procedure, the Applicant waived his rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request a General Court-Martial Convening Authority review.

Issues 1-2: (Nondecisional) The Applicant is requesting an upgrade to improve his employment options and gain VA benefits. There is no requirement, or law, that grants re-characterization solely on the issue of facilitating access to VA benefits. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing educational opportunities or employment opportunities. Regulations limit the NDRB’s review solely to a determination of the propriety and the equity of a discharge. As such, th ese issues do not serve to provide a foundation upon which the NDRB can grant relief.

Issue 3: (Decisional) (Equity) RELIEF NOT WARRANTED. During the hearing, the Applicant stated that his discharge characterization did not properly describe his period of service. The Applicant’s record documents two NJPs for violations of three articles of the UCMJ. The first NJP was for multiple incidents of misconduct including disrespect toward a Petty Officer in the scullery in addition to violating an information security policy by accessing a blocked Facebook while the ship was transiting the Strait of Hormuz. He then provided a statement regarding his use of the website that contradicted an earlier statement that he provided. The second NJP was for disrespect toward a Petty Officer and occurred while the Applicant was still on restriction from the first NJP. The Applicant testified that personality conflicts with his supervisors aboard USS HALYBURTON (FFG 40) contributed to the incidents, but he failed to convince the Board that he was not responsible for his misconduct. The record indicates that he did not exercise his right to appeal the findings of either NJP and when notified of separation proceedings, the Applicant waived his right to counsel, to submit a written statement, and request a General Court-Martial Convening Authority review.

A General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge is warranted when the quality of the member’s service has been honest and faithful but significant negative aspects of the member’s conduct or performance of duty outweighed the positive aspects of the member’s service record. The characterization of service received was appropriate considering the length of service and the UCMJ violations. The NDRB recognizes that serving in the military is challenging. However, most servicemembers serve honorably and therefore earn their Honorable discharges. In fairness to those servicemembers who served honorably, commanders and separation authorities are tasked to ensure that undeserving Sailors receive no higher characterization than is due. The NDRB found the characterization of the Applicant’s discharge was equitable and consistent with the characterization of discharge given others in similar circumstances. Relief denied.

Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, service record entries, and discharge process, the Board found the discharge was proper and equitable at the time of discharge. Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall remain UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL) and the narrative reason for separation shall remain MISCONDUCT - PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT.

The Applicant is not eligible for further reviews by the NDRB. The Applicant may petition the Board for Correction of Naval Records, 701 South Courthouse Road, Suite 1001, Arlington, VA 22204-2490 for further review using DD Form 149. Their website can be found at http://www.secnav.navy.mil/mra/bcnr. The Applicant is directed to the Addendum for additional information.


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 Applicant did not identify any decisional issues to the Board. However, 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 NUMBER OF NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13) warnings, NUMBER OF ???? for ????? of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article xx (Title of Article, specifics of charge), Article xx (Title of Article, specifics of charge), and Article xx (Title of Article, specifics of charge); and NUMBER OF ???? for ????? of the UCMJ: Article xx (Title of Article, specifics of charge). [For 112a violations, add : ( The Applicant also had a pre-service drug waiver for using marijuana ???? prior to entering the Navy.] Based on the offense(s) committed by the Applicant, ???? command administratively processed ???? for separation. [Based on the Article 112a violation, processing for administrative separation is mandatory.] 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 [an administrative board] [a General Court-Martial Convening Authority review]. [The NDRB did not have the Applicant’s administrative separation package to determine whether or not the Applicant waived ???? rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request an administrative board or a General Court-Martial Convening Authority review.]

???: (Nondecisional) [ STATE ISSUE ] USE THE PROPER PARAGRAPH FROM THE ADDENDUM

???: (Decisional) (Propriety/Equity) RELIEF NOT WARRANTED. [Intro sentence: e.g., The Applicant contends….] [Information to support or argue against the Applicant’s issue.]

---

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: Effective 6 February 2015, the NDRB is authorized to change a NDRB Applicant’s Reenlistment Code if related to an accompanying change in discharge characterization or narrative, but this authority is strictly limited to those cases where an applicant’s narrative reason or characterization of discharge is changed and that change warrants revision of the previously issued reenlistment code. 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