Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801192
Original file (ND0801192.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-AE3, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20080506
Characterization of Service Received:
Narrative Reason for Discharge:
Authority for Discharge: MILPERSMAN 3630650

Applicant’s Request: Characterization change to:
                  Narrative Reason change to:

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive: US N R (DEP) 19941119 - 19950122                 Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment: 19950123     Period of E nlistment : Years Extension D ate of Discharge: 19970924
Length of Service : Y ear s M onth s 02 D a ys Education Level:   Age at Enlistment:      AFQT: 57
Highest Rank /Rate : AE3    Evaluation M arks: Performance: 2.0 ( 1 )    Behavior: 1.0 ( 1 )         OTA: 2.33
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): NDSM

Period of UA : 19970911-19970912 (Less than 24 hours).

NJPs :

S CMs :

SPCMs:

C C :

Retention Warnings: .

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:           Substance Abuse:                           Criminal Records:       
         Family/Personal Status:           Community Service:                References:              
Additional Statements :
 From Applicant:        From Representat ion :    From Congress m ember :

Other Documentation (Describe) :









Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 14, effective 3 October 1996 until 11 December 1997, Article 3630650, PROCEDURES FOR PROCESSING ENLISTED PERSONNEL FOR 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 112a, wrongful use of methamphetamine.


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

Applicant’s Issues

 1. P assage of time ( post service conduct ) .

Decision

Date : 20 08 0925             Location: Washington D.C .        R epresentation :

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

 Issue 1: (Equity) RELIEF NOT WARRANTED. 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. The Applicant’s record of service was marred by an un-adjudicated violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), Article 112a (Drug use) which resulted in a discharge in lieu of tr i al by court-martial.

The NDRB is authorized to consider outstanding post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge , to the extent that such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the Applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review. However, there is no law or regulation which provides an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in the civilian life subsequent to leaving the service. 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 . Supporting documentation to help support a post service conduct upgrade includes, but is not limited to: a verifiable continuous employment record; 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 company’s or other financial institutions; documentation of a drug free lifestyle; and character witness statements. The Applicant should be aware 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 mitigates the reason for the characterization of discharge.

The Applicant provided nothing as evidence of post-service accomplishments. T o warrant an upgrade the Applicant’s post service efforts need to be more encompassing. She c ould have produced additional evidence as stated in the above paragraph with the full understanding completion of these items alone does not guarantee an upgrade. The Board determined based on the lack of documentation provided an upgrade would be inappropriate and the characterization of service received, “Under Other Than Honorable Conditions”, was an appropriate characterization considering the time served and the fact she separated from the service in lieu of tr i al for violation of the UCMJ, Article 112a (Wrongful use of m ethamphetamine ) is appropriate.

After a thorough review of the available documentation, to inclu de the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found

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, provi ded 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 grante d 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.
Employmen t / 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

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801746

    Original file (ND0801746.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s counsel requested an upgrade in the characterization of the Applicant’s service to Honorable and the narrative reason changed to convenience of the government based on the contention that the Applicant’s misconduct as discussed supra, is mitigated by his diagnosis of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and post-service conduct. After a thorough review of the his official service records, his post-service documentation regarding his PTSD, post-service accomplishments and...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001409

    Original file (ND1001409.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/ToCongress member: Pertinent Regulation/Law A. Moreover, although the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0902472

    Original file (ND0902472.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Regulations limit the Board’s review to a determination of the propriety and equity of the discharge.Additionally, 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.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entriesand discharge process, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800115

    Original file (ND0800115.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    However, the Board did determine that the record factually supported each of these reasons for discharge, that discharge was appropriate for the Applicant’s misconduct, and that a characterization of service as under other than honorable conditions was warranted by the misconduct clearly documented in the record. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800227

    Original file (ND0800227.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Types of Documents SubmittedRelated 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) Applicant Testified: Applicant Available for Questions: Witnesses: Observers:...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900513

    Original file (ND0900513.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1.Discharge inequitable because based on one isolated incident in over 7 years of service. 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 previous in-service misconduct was an...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800228

    Original file (ND0800228.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Immature Decision Date: 20080228Location: Washington D.C Representation: By a vote of the Characterization shall .By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall MISCONDUCT.Discussion : either which the Board cannot form the basis of relief for the Applicant, or the Board does not have the authority to grant the relief for which the Applicant petitioned. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0701128

    Original file (ND0701128.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request: Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service:Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 19940713Period of enlistment: Years(3 active)Date of Discharge:19951031Length of Service: Yrs Mths19 DysEducation Level: Age at Enlistment:AFQT: 34Highest Rank/Rate:AREvaluation marks:Performance: 3.4(1) Behavior:3.2(1)OTA: 3.40Awards and Decorations (per DD 214): Rifle , Pistol Periods of UA/Confinement: 19941222-19941223;...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800657

    Original file (ND0800657.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Decision Date: 20080530Location: Washington D.C Representation: By a vote of the Characterization shall .By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall IN LIEU OF TRIAL BY COURT MARTIAL.Discussion :() either which the Board cannot form the basis of relief for the Applicant, or the Board does not have the authority to grant the relief for which the Applicant petitioned. The Board determined an upgrade or change would be inappropriate.In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900285

    Original file (ND0900285.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. The NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge to resolve pay or service benefit issues. ” 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.