ex- CAPT, 

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20180503
Characterization of Service Received:   
Narrative Reason for Discharge:   UNACCEPTABLE CONDUCT
Authority for Discharge:    SECNAVINST 1920.6C 

Applicant’s Request:	Characterization change to:	
Narrative Reason change to: DISCHARGE FOR RETIREMENT AS OFFICER
Reentry Code change to: NONE REQUESTED

Summary of Service
Prior Service:
Inactive:  NONE		Active:	 19950320 – 20070510  HON (To accept Commission to 2ND LT)  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Appointment:  20070511	Age:  
Years Contracted:  Indefinite
Date of Discharge:  20151031	Highest Rank:  CAPT
Length of Service:   Year(s)     Month(s)   20 Day(s)
Education Level:  	AFQT:  80
Officer’s Fitness reports:  Available

Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):	Rifle  Pistol  NMCCM NMCAM (2) AAM PUCN NMUC GCM (4) NDSM (2) AFEM ACM (w/2 Stars) GWOTSM AFSM SSDR (3) NMCOSR (4) MCDIR NATO-Medal-ISAF Afghanistan CoC (Individual Award)(5) CoA LoA (3) MM (3) NATO Medal  

Periods of UA:  NONE
Periods of CONF:  NONE
Other Time Lost per DD214:  NONE

Discharge Process

20140324:	The Applicant received NJP for violation of Articles 92 and 111.     
		Awarded a Punitive Letter of Reprimand. 

20140620:	The Commander, Marine Corps Installations Command documented additional misconduct (public intoxication on 3 May 2014).

20140626:	The Applicant’s case was referred to a Board of Inquiry (BOI) for a show cause determination.

20140804:	Applicant submits a request for retirements in lieu of further administrative processing which is forwarded recommending approval throughout the Applicant’s chain of command.

201508xx:	Deputy Commandant, Manpower and Reserve Affairs, recommends to the Assistant Secretary of the Navy (Manpower and Reserve Affairs) that the Applicant be allowed to retire at his current rank with an Honorable characterization by reason of unacceptable conduct.  

20150825:	Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Navy (Manpower and Reserve Affairs) approves DC, M&RA’s recommendation for approval of retirement at current grade with an Honorable characterization by reason of unacceptable conduct.  

20151031:	Applicant discharged this date.

SCM:    SPCM:    CIVIL ARREST:    CC:     Retention Warning Counseling:  

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

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

	  “SECNAVINST 1920.6C”
	
The NDRB will recommend to Commander, Navy Personnel Command or Commandant of the Marine Corps that the DD 214 be corrected as appropriate.

Types of Documents Submitted/reviewed

	DD 214:		Service/Medical Record:		Other Records:	
	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.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 1920.6C (ADMINISTRATIVE SEPARATION OF OFFICERS), effective 15 December 2005 until Present, establishes policies, standards and procedures for the administrative separation of Navy and Marine Corps officers from the naval service in accordance with Title 10, United States Code and DoD Directive 1332.30 of 14 March 1997.

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)(a), Presumption Concerning Court-Martial Specifications.

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

Applicant’s Issues

1.  The Applicant contends the narrative of his discharge was improper and inequitable.  
2.  The Applicant contends that this was an isolated incident and his in-service conduct should be considered for an upgrade.    

discussion

Date:  20190205		Location:  WASHINGTON D.C.	Representation:  

The Naval Discharge Review Board (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 the pertinent standards of equity and propriety were met.   

The Applicant's record of service included:

 Nonjudicial Punishment for  of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): 
	 -	Article 92 (Failure to obey order, regulation), and Article 111 (Drunk or reckless operation of vehicle, airscraft, or vessel)

Issues 1 & 2:  The Applicant contends the narrative of his discharge was improper and inequitable.  Specifically, the Applicant contends that the current narrative reason for separation was based on one isolated incident in more than 20 years of otherwise honorable service.  The NDRB reviews the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge individually, on a case-by-case basis.  If such a review reveals an impropriety or inequity, relief is in order.  Regulations permit relief on equitable grounds if the Applicant’s discharge is inconsistent with standards of discipline of the Naval Service.  The Applicant was found guilty at NJP of violation of Articles 92 and 111.  The Applicant was referred to a BOI at which point the Applicant submitted a request for retirements in lieu of further administrative processing.  The DC, M&RA acting on behalf of the Commandant of the Marine Corps concurred with the Applicant’s chain of command and recommended separation at his current rank with and Honorable characterization and a narrative of unacceptable conduct which was approved by the Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Manpower and Reserve Affairs.  This action was proper and well within the authorities of his office.  In the official record, the Applicant acknowledges that his conduct was unacceptable for an officer in the Marine Corps.  The Applicant’s misconduct was not in keeping with the standards and traditions of the Naval Service and outweigh any in-service conduct that occurred before the incidents in question.  Therefore, the NDRB found that the Applicant’s discharge was proper, equitable, and consistent with the characterization and narrative of discharge given others in similar circumstances.

decision

After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s issues, summary of service,  record entries, and discharge process, the Board found the discharge was proper and equitable.  Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall  HONORABLE, the narrative reason for separation shall  UNACCEPTABLE CONDUCT with a corresponding separation code of RNC1.  The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing for a period of fifteen years from the date of the 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/.  More information is available at http://www.secnav.navy.mil/mra/CORB/pages/ndrb/default.aspx.

Additional Reviews: After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance or telephonic 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, or http://www.secnav.navy.mil/mra/bcnr/Pages/default.aspx 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: 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-Traumatic Stress Disorder and/or Traumatic Brain Injury: For all claims involving PTSD and/or TBI, the NDRB’s review implemented the guidance set forth in the SECDEF Memorandum of 3 September 2014 (Supplemental guidance to Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records Considering Discharge Upgrade Requests by Veterans Claiming Post Traumatic Stress Disorder).  In accordance with U.S. Code, Title X, Section 1553 (d)(1) & d(2), the NDRB included a member who is a physician, clinical psychologist, or psychiatrist and accorded the case sufficient priority to achieve an expedited resolution and a final decision.

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.

Military Sexual Trauma: The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) uses the term "military sexual trauma" (MST) to refer to experiences of sexual assault or repeated, threatening sexual harassment experienced while on federal active duty, active duty for training, or inactive duty training.  To get confidential one-on-one help please contact the MST Coordinator at your nearest VA Medical Center or Call Safe Helpline at 1-877-995-5247 or visit www.mentalhealth.va.gov/msthome.asp.

Reporting Military Sexual Trauma: To report a military sexual trauma, you can make an anonymous report to the Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS) by Text or Online.  The NCIS Tip Line provides service members, veterans and civilians a safe, discreet and ANONYMOUS option to report criminal and force protection threats within the USN and USMC without concerns of retaliation.  To report a crime by Text: Text  274637 (CRIMES); Type “NCIS” at the top of the message; and include as much detail as possible to ensure your tip can effectively be investigated.  To send your ANONYMOUS Tip via the online, go to https://www.tipsubmit.com/webtipsNAV.aspx?AgencyID=840.

Suicide Prevention: Veterans in emotional crisis or their loved ones can call the free and confidential Veterans Crisis Line at 1-800-273-8255 (then press 1); or chat online at http://www.veteranscrisisline.net, or send a text message to 838255 to connect with a caring, qualified Veteran Affairs Responder who can deal with any immediate crisis.  

Recorder Review of Discharge Process

DELETE THIS PAGE WHEN FINALIZING THE DECISIONAL DOCUMENT

Notification:
Applicant accurately notified of reason for discharge?			Yes 	No 	Not found in record 
Applicant accurately notified of least favorable characterization?	Yes 	No 	Not found in record 
Applicant accurately notified of applicable rights?			Yes 	No 	Not found in record 
 
Rights Elected:	Not found in record 		Waived all rights  
Counsel  	Copies  	    Statement  		GCMCA review 	Administrative Board 

Administrative Board	Not applicable   	Waived  	Not found in record 
Reason(s) for discharge supported?					Yes 	No 	Not found in record 
Recommendation?		Retain  	Separate  	
Recommendation for suspension?					Yes 	No 	Not found in record 

CO recommendation:		Retain  	Separate  	

Proper Separation Authority?	     				Yes 	No 	Not found in record 
Reason for discharge directed:  	UNACCEPTABLE CONDUCT
Characterization directed:		

Were factual requirements for separation met?			Yes 	No 	Not found in record 
Was retention warning required for reason for separation?		Yes 	No 	
	Was retention warning given?				Yes 	No 	Not found in record 
COSO:  Was punitive discharge authorized for offense?		Yes 	No 	Not found in record