ex-EMFR, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20110608
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)	19990129 - 19990929  	Active:	
	USNR (DEP)	20010127 - 20010305  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment:  20010306	Age at Enlistment:  
Period of Enlistment:   Years   Extension
Date of Discharge:  20030905	Highest Rank/Rate:  EMFA
Length of Service:   Year     Months   29 Days
Education Level:  	AFQT:  54/61
Evaluation Marks:	Performance:  2.0 (1)	Behavior:  2.0 (1)	OTA:  2.17

Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):	NDSM 

Periods of UA/CONF:  UA 20020218 - 20020321 (31 days)

NJP:  3
- 20020322:	Article 86 (Absence without leave, 31 days, 20020218-20020321)
	Article 87 (Missing movement, 3 specifications)
	Awarded: RIR (to E-1) FOP RESTR   Suspended:  RIR FOP (suspend 6 months)
	[* Suspended sentence vacated 20020807 due to continued misconduct]

- 20020807:	Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation, possessing pornography on government computer)
	Awarded: FOP RESTR (45 days)   Suspended:  FOP RESTR (suspend 6 months)

- 20030605:	Article 91 (Insubordinate conduct toward a First Class Petty Officer, 20030508)
	Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation, 2 specifications)
		Specification 1: Failed to comply with orders from a Chief Petty Officer, 20030508
		Specification 2: Failed to obey an order from a First Class Petty Officer, 20030530
	Awarded: RIR (to E-1) RESTR EPD   Suspended: NONE

SCM:  NONE	SPCM:  NONE	CC:  NONE 

Retention Warning Counseling:  1

- 20020322:	For violation of the UCMJ, Article 86 - Unauthorized absence from 18 February 2002 until 21 March 2002; and violation of UCMJ Article 87 (3 specifications) - missed ship’s movement on or about 19 February 2002, 4 March 2002, and 11 March 2002 as evidenced by CO’s NJP of 22 March 2002.

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

The NDRB did note administrative errors on the original DD Form 214:

	Block 12a, Date Entered Active Duty, should read: “01 03 06”
	Block 12c, Net Active Service, should read: “02 04 29”
	 Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, should read:  “NATIONAL DEFENSE SERVICE MEDAL, BATTLE E RIBBON”
	  “UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS”
	Block 29, Time Lost, should read: “(31) 20020218-20020321”

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), re-issued October 2002, effective 22 August 2002 until 25 April 2005, 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 II, Para 211, Regularity of Government Affairs, Part V, Para 502, Propriety and Para 503, Equity.

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

Applicant’s Issues

1.	Applicant contends marital problems contributed to the misconduct for which he was separated.
2.	Applicant believes his post-service achievements warrant consideration for a discharge upgrade.

Decision

Date:  20120906		Location:  Washington D.C.	Representation:  NONE

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 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 NDRB conducted a thorough review of the Applicant’s record of service to determine whether his discharge met the pertinent standards of propriety and equity.  The Applicant’s record of service included one NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13) retention warning and three nonjudicial punishments (NJPs) for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 86 (Absence without leave, 18 February-21 March 2002, 31 days), Article 87 (Missing movement, 3 specifications: 19 February, 4 March, and 11 March 2002), Article 91 (Insubordinate conduct toward a petty officer, disrespectful in language toward a First Class Petty Officer by stating, “Fxxx you. You’re a little bxxxx. What are you going to do about it?” or words to that effect, o/o 8 May 2003), and Article 92 (Failure to obey an order or regulation, 3 specifications: Failed to obey orders from a Chief Petty Officer by not completing a field day of the port-side double ladder and completing his extra military instruction; and failed to obey an order from a First Class Petty Officer by not checking out with the EDO prior to securing, o/o 30 May 2003; and possessed and forwarded pornographic material on a U.S. government computer system, 5 August 2002).  Based on the repeated offenses committed by the Applicant, his command administratively processed him for separation.  When notified of administrative separation processing for Pattern of Misconduct and Commission of a Serious Offense using the  procedure on 22 January 2003, the Applicant waived  rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request an administrative separation board.  On 23 July 2003, the Applicant’s Commanding Officer endorsed his administrative separation package documentation, stating “(The Applicant’s) enlistment has been marred by repeated disciplinary infractions.  He has been to mast 3 times in a two year span.  (The Applicant) fails to take responsibility for his actions despite his chain of command’s attempts to rehabilitate him.  (The Applicant) shows contempt and disrespect toward his superiors and fails to obey orders when given.  He has become an administrative burden on my command and he has shown no potential for further productive service.”  On 20 August 2003, the Separation Authority directed that the Applicant be separated from the Navy with an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge due to Pattern of Misconduct.  The Applicant was discharged on 5 September 2003 as directed.

:  (Decisional) ()  .  The Applicant contends marital problems contributed to the misconduct for which he was separated.  The Board conducted an exhaustive review of the records and found no evidence to support, nor did the Applicant provide any evidence to indicate, he attempted to use the numerous services available for service members who undergo personal problems during their enlistments such as the Navy Chaplain, Medical or Mental Health professionals, Navy Relief Society, Family Advocacy Programs, or even the Red Cross.  The NDRB recognizes that serving in the U.S. Navy is challenging.  However, all members of the Naval Services are expected to uphold the high standards of conduct as evidenced in our Core Values of Honor, Courage, and Commitment, regardless of the environment or mission in which assigned.  After careful consideration, the Board determined this issue did not provide a basis for which relief could be granted.  Relief denied.

:  (Decisional) ()  .  The Applicant believes his post-service achievements warrant consideration for a discharge upgrade.  The NDRB considers post-service conduct in order to determine if the misconduct committed during active duty was indicative of the Applicant’s character or an aberration.  However, there is no law or regulation that provides an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in civilian life subsequent to leaving the service.  Normally, to permit relief, a procedural impropriety or inequity must have been found to have existed during the period of enlistment in question.  The Applicant provided a personal statement, an employer character letter, and a copy of a power of attorney as evidence of post-service accomplishments.  Although his efforts to improve his life are noteworthy, he failed to provide adequate documentation and evidence on his behalf to support a thorough post-service conduct review.  He could have submitted documentation as specified 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.  Without any additional post-service documentary evidence, the Board determined the awarded characterization of service shall remain Under Other Than Honorable Conditions.  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 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