Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900543
Original file (ND0900543.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-HR, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20090108
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:         US N R (DEP) :       NONE    Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Enlistment: 19961118     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20010129      Highest Rank/Rate: HA
Length of Service : Y ear ( s ) M onth ( s ) 14 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 43
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 3.0 ( 1 )      Behavior: 1.0 ( 1 )        OTA: 2.67

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Pistol

Periods of UA : 19990422-19990531 (40 Days)
19990612-20010129 (593 Days)

SCM: CC: Retention Warning Counseling:

NJP :
- 19970807 : Article 112a (Drug use)
Awarded: Suspended:

SPCM:
- 19990428 : Art icle 81 (Conspiracy)
Article 134, 2 Specifications :
                  - Specification 1: Wrongfully defraud, pass, attempt to pass and keep in possession counterfeit
s ecurities.
                  - Specification 2: Wrongfully buy and receive counterfeit securities.
          Sentence : Forfeiture of $600.00 ppm x 4 months (W/O suspension); Confinement x 120 days (W/O
suspension); Reduction in grade to HR/E-1 (W/O suspension) and awarded a Bad Conduct
Discharge (W/O suspension).

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:              



Related to Post-Service Perio d (cont):

Additional Statements :
 From Applicant:        From Representat ion :    From Congress m ember :

Oth er Documentation :

Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A. The Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 22, effective 15 December 1998 to
21 August 2002, Article 5815-010, Executing a Dishonorable or Bad Conduct Discharge.
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 .
C . 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 .

D . 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 (Drug abuse) .


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

Applicant’s Issues

 1. Desires to continue in civil service.

Decision

Date: 20 0 9 0430             Location: Washington D.C .        R epresentation :

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
 By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall COURT-MARTIAL .
Discussion

 Issue 1: ( ) . The Applicant contends he is entitled to clemency due to his desire to continue in civil service. 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 1 NJP and 1 SPCM for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 81 (Conspiracy); Article 112a (Drug use) and Article 134 (2 specifications for counterfeit securities). There are also two periods of U A noted in the record: 19990422-19990531 (40 d ays) and 19990612-20010129 (593 d ays). The NDRB advises the Applicant certain serious offenses, even though isolated, warrant separation from the service in order to maintain proper order and discipline. Violation of Article 112a is one such offense requiring mandatory separation regardless of time in service or grade. Violations of this policy result in, at a minimum, mandatory processing for an administrative separation which usually results in an unfavorable characterization of discharge or, at a maximum, a punitive discharge and possible confinement if adjudicated and awarded as part of a sentence by a special or general court-martial.

In response to the Applicant’s clemency request, relevant and material facts stated in a court-martial specification are presumed by the NDRB to be established facts. With respect to a discharge adjudged by a court-martial case, the action of the NDRB is restricted to upgrades based on clemency. Clemency is an act of leniency which reduces the severity of the punishment imposed. The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in determining if clemency is warranted. However, there is no law or regulation, which provides clemency 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. Documentation to help support post service conduct clemency, but is not limited to: a verifiable continuous employment record; marriage and children’s birth certificate (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; 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 previous in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member’s overall character. T he NDR B determined the evidence of post-service conduct is not sufficient to warrant clemency. To warrant clemency the Applicant’s post service efforts need to be more encompassing. The Applicant could have produced additional evidence as stated in the above paragraph with the full understanding completion of these items alone does not guarantee clemency.

After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Service and Medical Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, t he Board found clemency was not warranted and the sentence awarded the Applicant at his court-martial was appropriate for the offenses he committed.



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 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 Board for Correction of Naval Records (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 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 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 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 NDRB 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 NDRB B oard 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 | 2009_Navy | ND0900864

    Original file (ND0900864.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 Representation: From Congress member: Other Documentation: DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700972

    Original file (ND0700972.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Applicant’s Issues:1. The Applicant’s case was considered under the pertinent standards of equity to determine if any factors in this particular case merited clemency. Additionally, the Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801862

    Original file (ND0801862.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Violation of Article 112a is one such offense requiring mandatory separation regardless of time in service or grade. The Board determined the awarded discharge characterization was appropriate in light of the Applicant’s previous violations and an upgrade would be inappropriate.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 ADDENDUM: Information for...

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0800519

    Original file (MD0800519.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request: Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USMCR (DEP)20010129 - 20010618Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20010619Period of enlistment: Years MonthsDate of Discharge:20040415Length of Service: Yrs Mths28 DysEducation Level: Age at Enlistment:AFQT: 53MOS: 0121Highest Rank: Fitness reports: Proficiency/Conduct marks (# of occasions): ()/()Awards and Decorations (per DD 214): Rifle (2)...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901413

    Original file (MD0901413.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant would like his RE code upgraded so he can reenlist. While the Applicant’s request for a discharge was considered inappropriate due to the nature of his in-service conduct, the board did find an upgrade from Bad Conduct to Under Other Than Honorable Conditions to be most appropriate.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, and discharge process, the Board found Therefore, the awarded...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900554

    Original file (ND0900554.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall MISCONDUCT.Discussion : The Applicant is seeking an upgrade in order to obtain better job opportunities and obtain other benefits. Should the Applicant obtain additional evidence or post service documentation he may wish to apply for a personal appearance. ” 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900248

    Original file (ND0900248.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    ex-HTFN, USN Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request Application Received: 20081112 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) 19990422 - 19990503 Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 19990504 Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: Years Extension Date of Discharge:...

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801843

    Original file (MD0801843.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board determined the characterization of service received, “Under Other Than Honorable Conditions”, was an appropriate characterization considering the time served and the UCMJ violations involved, and based on the limited post service documentation provided an upgrade would be inappropriate.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found Pertinent...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801375

    Original file (ND0801375.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1200664

    Original file (MD1200664.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB reviewed all of the available records, supporting documents, facts, elements of discharge, and post-service statements and documentation submitted by the Applicant and determined that clemency was not warranted. 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...