ex-MM3, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received:  20080415
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: USNR (DEP) 20000316 - 20000627  		Active:   

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment: 20000628	Period of Enlistment:   Years   Extension	Date of Discharge:  20070516
Length of Service:    Yrs    Mths  19  Dys	Education Level:  	Age at Enlistment:  	AFQT:  96
Highest Rank/Rate:  MM3  	Evaluation Marks:  Performance: NFIR	Behavior: NFIR	OTA:  NFIR
Awards and Decorations (per DD 214): Rifle      

Periods of UA:  200410-20061114 (incomplete date. unable to determine exact number of days; minimum 730–744 days),  
                          20061129-20070417 (140 days).

NJPs:	
20021101: Extracted from Administrative Remarks NAVPERS 1070/613 dated 20021102.
                  Awarded - No further information found in service record.

Retention Warnings:  .
20021102:	For dereliction in the performance of duty by willfully failing to check the level of the poly bottles in #4 Reactor Auxiliary Room on 20021029, that led to your nonjudicial punishment of 20021101.

Types of Documents Submitted/reviewed

Related 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):   DD Form 149

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

Applicant’s Issues

1. The Applicant claims his unauthorized absence was caused by poor planning and unforeseen transportation issues. 

Decision

Date:  20080828		Location:  Washington D.C	 Representation:  

By a vote of  the Characterization shall  .
By a vote of  the Narrative Reason shall  IN LIEU OF TRIAL BY COURTS-MARTIAL.

Discussion

:  ()  .  The Applicant claims his unauthorized absence was cause by poor planning and unforeseen transportation issues.  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.  While the Applicant may feel his planning and transportation issues contributed greatly to his misconduct, the record did not show the Applicant was either not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions based on his lack of planning or transportation.  The Applicant’s record of service was marred by a retention warning for dereliction of duty and 1 non-judicial punishment for unauthorized more than 30 days on two separate occasions; the first being a minimum of approximately 730 days followed almost immediately by another absence of 140 days.  The Board determined an upgrade to a General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization would be inappropriate based on the extensive unauthorized absence and the “Under Other Than Honorable Conditions” characterization was warranted.  
      
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 

Pertinent Regulation/Law

A.  Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 11, effective 31 May 2005 and Present, Article 1910-106, SEPARATION IN LIEU OF TRIAL BY COURT-MARTIAL.

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 86, more than 30 days.

D.  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.

ADDENDUM:  Information for the Applicant

Complaint Procedures:  If you believe that 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:  Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years from the 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.  If a former member has been discharged for more than 15 years, has already been granted a personal appearance hearing or has otherwise exhausted his opportunities before the NDRB, the Applicant may petition the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR), 2 Navy Annex, Washington, DC 20370-5100 for further review.

Service Benefits:  The Veterans Administration determines eligibility for post-service benefits, not the Naval Discharge Review Board.  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 Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational opportunities.  Regulations limit the Board’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 Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) can make changes to reenlistment codes.  Additionally, the Board 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 subsequently is processed for an administrative involuntary separation or is referred to a court martial for misconduct, the disability evaluation is suspended.  The Physical Evaluation Board case remains in suspense pending the outcome of the non-disability proceedings.  If the action includes either a punitive or administrative discharge for misconduct, 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 Board for Correction of Naval Records can grant this type of narrative reason change.

Automatic Upgrades - There is no law or regulation, which provides that an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in civilian life subsequent to leaving Naval service.  The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge 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.  Examples of documentation that may be provided to the Board include proof of educational pursuits, verifiable employment records, documentation of community service, credible evidence of a substance free lifestyle and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities.

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 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