Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1002307
Original file (ND1002307.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-SA, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20100921
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)        20020813 - 20021008     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20021009     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20050608      Highest Rank/Rate: SN
Length of Service : Y ear s M onth s 00 D a ys
Education Level:        AFQT: 44
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 3.0 ( 2 )      Behavior: 2.5 ( 2 )        OTA: 2.75

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      NDSM GWOTEM

Period of UA : 20040719 - 20040819, 31 days

NJP :

- 20050510 :      Article 86 (Absence without leave, 20050201 - 20050510, 99 days)
         Article 87 (Missing movement)
         Article 112a (Wrongful use of controlled substance)
         Awarded: RIR RESTR EPD Suspended:

S CM : NONE      

SPCM: NONE      

C C : NONE        

Retention Warning Counseling : NONE

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

The NDRB did note administrative errors on the original DD Form 214:
         “ UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS ”
         Block 26, Separation Code, should read: “HKK ”
         “ MISCONDUCT (DRUG ABUSE) ”

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:                  Oth er Documentation:    
                  Additional Statements :
         From Applicant:            From /To Representation:            From /To Congress m ember :        

Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A. The Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 11, effective 29 April 2005 until 1 June 2008, 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.       The Applicant seeks an upgrade to re-enlist .
2 .        The Applicant seeks an upgrade for employment and educational benefits.
3.       The Applicant contends family problems contributed to his misconduct.
4.       The Applicant contends youth and immaturity were contributing factors in his misconduct.
Decision

Date: 2011 1208             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 governmental affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant. T he Board did complete a thorough review of the circumstances that l ed to 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 (NJP) for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article ( , , 99 days ), Article ( , ), and Article (Wrongful use, possession of a controlled substance, ). Based on the offenses committed by the Applicant, command administratively processed for separation. Based on the Article 112a violation, processing for administrative separation is mandatory. The NDRB did not have the Applicant’s administrative separation package to determine whether or not the Applicant waived rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request an administrative board or a General Court-Martial Convening Authority review.

 : (Nondecisional) The Applicant seeks an upgrade to qualify for a commission in the military . Since the NDRB has no jurisdiction over reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Navy, Marine Corps, or any other of the Armed Forces, it is not authorized to change an RE code. 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. Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records can make changes to reenlistment codes.

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant wants his discharge upgraded so he can be eligible for the Post 9/11 GI Bill and any other benefits that would aid him in furthering his education. The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs determines eligibility for post-service benefits, not the Naval Discharge Review Board. There is no requirement, or law, that grants re-characterization of a discharge solely on the issue of making a former service member eligible for v eterans educational benefits , and this issue does not serve to provide a foundation upon which the Board can grant relief. Also, t he NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the purpose of enhancing employment opportunities. Regulations limit the Board’s review to a determination of the propriety and equity of the discharge.

: ( D ecisional) (Equity) RELIEF NOT WARRANTED. The Applicant contends family problems contributed to his misconduct. The Applicant provided no documentation in support of his claim. The NDRB recognizes that many service members experience family problems during their enlistment s but still manage to serve honorably. While the Board understands some members experience family problems that are more severe than what others experience, it does not view a claim of family problems to be a mitigating factor or a sufficient reason for misconduct. There are numerous options available in the Navy to deal with family difficulties. Going UA for 99 days and using an illegal drug are not appropriate options. The Board found the Applicant ’ s claim of family p roblems to be insufficient justification to warrant an upgrade. Relief denied.




: ( D ecisional) (Equity) RELIEF NOT WARRANTED. The Applicant contends his misconduct was due to youth and immaturity. He indicates that he has matured over time and has learned from his mistakes. The NDRB recognizes that many service members are young when they enlist for service but still manage to serve honorably. The Board also understands some members are not as mature or others, but it does not view a member’s claim of youth and immaturity to be a mitigating factor or a sufficient reason for misconduct. Relief denied.

Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s s ummary of s ervice and r ecord e ntries, 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, specifically the paragraphs titled Additional Reviews, Automatic Upgrades, and Post-Service Conduct .


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 | 2007_Navy | ND0700734

    Original file (ND0700734.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s medical record also indicated a diagnosis, by competent medical authority, of personality disorder not otherwise specified. 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. With respect to a discharge adjudged by a court-martial, the action of the NDRB is restricted to upgrades based on clemency.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0902469

    Original file (ND0902469.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Regulations limit the Board’s review to a determination of the propriety and equity of the discharge.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 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. ...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000316

    Original file (ND1000316.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall (SERIOUS OFFENSE).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. The administrative board voted unanimously to recommend to the separating authority to separate the Applicant with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800079

    Original file (ND0800079.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant is directed to the Addendum regarding .Issue 2:After a review of the Applicant’s service record, MILPERSMAN 1910-158 for period under review, and other evidence presented to the NDRB, it was determined that relief is warranted based upon an impropriety in the characterization of service. ” 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1001647

    Original file (MD1001647.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 shall remain . ” 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800197

    Original file (ND0800197.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 Pertinent Regulation/Law A. ” 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. ” Only the Board for Correction of Naval...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801451

    Original file (ND0801451.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 conduct mitigates the reason for the characterization of discharge.At this time, the Applicant has not provided any documentation of post service performance for the Board to consider an upgrade.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0902430

    Original file (ND0902430.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Representation: 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800699

    Original file (ND0800699.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant should be aware post service conduct 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 the discharge.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 Pertinent...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900297

    Original file (ND0900297.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB determined based on the frequency and seriousness of the misconduct committed by the Applicant and the absence of mitigating circumstances that an upgrade is not warranted.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 shall remain MISCONDUCT (DRUG ABUSE).The Applicant...