Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001985
Original file (ND1001985.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-STGSR, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20100804
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)        20000831 - 2000925      Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Current Enlistment: 20000926     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20010418      Highest Rank/Rate: STGSA
Length of Service : Y ear ( s ) M onth ( s ) 23 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 84
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: NFIR         Behavior: NFIR   OTA:     NFIR

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      NONE

Period of C ONF :

NJP:

- 20010302 :      Article (UA) , 2 specifications
         Specification 1: A bsent f rom p lace of d uty 0630 - 1030 , 20010220
         Specification 2: A bsent f rom p lace of d uty 0730 - 0750 , 20010221
         Article ( Failure to obey a lawful order, h ad a female inside a male only lounge )
         Article 107 (False official statement) , 2 specifications
         Specification 1: False Statement on 20010213
         Specification 2: False Statement on 20010302
         Article 108: ( Destruction of United States Government Property, w illfully destroyed a page of a deck log on 20010213 )
         Article 123: ( Forgery, s igning another member ’ s name in a deck log on 20010213 )
          Awarded: Suspended:

- 20010322 :     Article ( Failure to obey an order, f ailed to provide a urine sample on 20010322 )
         Article 134 ( General A rticle, b reak r estriction on 20010314)
         Awarded: Suspended:

-20010328: A rticle 112a (Drugs - Marijuana )
Article 92 ( Failure to obey an order or regulation) , 2 specifications
Specification 1: W rongfully wear coveralls rolled down and tucked underneath jacket 20010325
Specification 2: W rongfully wear his shoes untied 20010325
Awarded: RESTR EPD FOP  Suspended: None

SCM:     SPCM:    C C :



Retention Warning Counseling:

- 20010302 :       For violation of Article 86 , Unauthorized Absence from place of duty; Article 91 , Failing to obe y a lawful order issued by a non commissioned officer; Article 92 , Disobeying a lawful order or regulation ; Article 107 , Making a false official statement ; and Article 123 , Forgery.

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 . The Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 31, effective 12 February 2001 until
15 July 2001, Article 1910-146, SEPARATION BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT - DRUG ABUSE.

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 asserts that since his discharge, he was diagnosed with a mental disorder. He further asserts that since he has been in treatment for his mental disorder , he h as ha d no more problems with drugs.

Decision

Date: 20 1 1 0915             Location: Washington D.C .        R epresentation :

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 g overnment al affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant. T he Board complete d a thorough review of the circumstances that led to discharge and the discharge process to ensure discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety. The Applicant’s record of service included one NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13) warning and three non-judicial punishments for violations o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 86 ( Absence without leave, 2 specifications), Article 92 ( Failure to obey order or regulation, 4 specifications) , Article 107 ( False official statement, 2 specifications), Article 108 (Destruction of United States Government Property, 1 specification), Article 112a (Wrongful use, possession of a controlled substance, 1 specification), Article 123 (Forgery, 1 specification), and Article 134 (General Article, b reaking restriction, 1 specification). The Applicant did not require a pre-service drug waiver to enter the Navy. Based on the Article 112a violation, processing for administ rative separation is mandatory. When notified of administrative separation processing using the procedure, the Applicant rights to consult with a qualified coun sel, submit a written statement , and request an administrati ve board.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant asserts that since his discharge, he was diagnosed with a mental disorder. He further asserts that since he has been in treatment for his mental disorder , he has had no more problems with drugs. The Applicant also provided character references describing his post-service conduct and achievements. The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the re-characterization of a discharge. However, there is no law, or regulation, that provides that an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on good conduct in civilian life subsequent to leaving the service. Normally, to permit relief, a procedural impropriety or inequity must have been found to exist during the period of enlistment in question. The Applicant submitted d ocumentation along with his DD Form 293 that thoroughly describes his mental condition and mentions how hard he has worked toward a better future. The Board applauds the Applicant’s efforts to improve his life . However, it determined that his efforts alone , which were following a diagnosis that occurred several years after his discharge, d o not provide a thorough understanding of the Applicant’s conduct during his time in service. In addition, due to the Applicant’s numerous violations of the UCMJ over a relatively short period, the Board concluded that his post-service achievements did not demonstrate his in-service misconduct was an aberration , and were not sufficient justification to upgrade his discharge. Relief denied.

Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s s ummary of s ervice, r ecord e ntries and d ischarge p rocess, 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), 2 Navy Annex, Washington, DC 20370-5100 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

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1401117

    Original file (ND1401117.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ” 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. 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. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001501

    Original file (ND1001501.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. ” 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. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities.

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900067

    Original file (MD0900067.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received at the NDRB within 15 years from the date of discharge. ” 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. If a former member has been discharged for more than 15 years, has already been granted a personal appearance hearing or has...

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1100173

    Original file (MD1100173.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Court of Appeals Review - Decision dated 30 October 2006; the finding as to the Additional Charge I and its sole specification (Article 80 - Attempts) is set aside. After a thorough review of the Applicant’s record and the issues as submitted, the NDRB determined that clemency was not warranted and that the sentence awarded the Applicant at her court-martial was appropriate.Accordingly, clemency, as requested, is denied. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901896

    Original file (ND0901896.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    However, even if the Applicant could have produced additional evidence to support a review based on his post-service conduct, the Applicant must have a full understanding that post-service conduct alone does not guarantee an upgrade.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 characterization of service shall and the narrative reason for separation...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801883

    Original file (ND0801883.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant has requested an upgrade to his discharge due to the fact his post service conduct shows he has changed and become a productive citizen in his community.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 Board determined the Applicant post service conduct did not warrant an upgrade to“Honorable” however; it was...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700760

    Original file (ND0700760.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Medical and Service Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found that Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USNR (DEP)19800627 - 19800728Active: 19800729 - 19860629 19860630 - 19910822 19910823 - 19941024 Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 19941025Years Contracted:; Extension: Date of Discharge:19960610Length of Service: 1 Yrs...

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0601193

    Original file (MD0601193.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Service Record Entries, Medical Record Entries, Elements of Discharge and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found the Applicant’s discharge proper and equitable. UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS (20050817) SJA review (date): (20050907)Separation Authority (date): COMMANDING GENERAL, MARINE AIR GROUND TASK FORCE TRAINING (20050907)Narrative Reason directed: Characterization...

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1000110

    Original file (MD1000110.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. 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. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800609

    Original file (ND0800609.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Administrative board then voted 2-1 that the misconduct warranted separation with a characterization of service as under other than honorable conditions. In accordance with regulation, when separation processing is warranted for more than one reason the service member shall be processed for all valid causes. Violations of UCMJ Articles 107 and 123 constitute the “commission of a serious offense”, the discharge basis in this case.