Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100340
Original file (ND1100340.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-BM2, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20101123
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)        19970827 - 19980614     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Current Enlistment: 19980615     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years 4 Months Extension
Date of Discharge: 20030319      Highest Rank/Rate: BM2
Length of Service : Y ear s M onth s 05 D a ys
Education Level:        AFQT: 49
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 3.8 ( 6 )      Behavior: 3.3 ( 6 )        OTA: 3.58

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle EX Pistol EX NMCAM NUC (2) NAVY BATTLE “E” (4) GCM NDSM AFEM (3) SSDR (3) OSR ESWS

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP: NFIR        SCM: NONE        SPCM:    C C :      Retention Warning Counseling: NFIR

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), re-issued October 2002, effective 22 August 2002 until 28 April 2005, 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 contends his discharge was unjust , because a lot of the e vidence used against him was fabricated by NCIS.
 2.       Applicant contends his record of service as evidenced by his evaluations, awards, and rapid promotions warrant consideration for upgrading his discharge.
3.       Post-service conduct warrants consideration for upgrading his discharge.
Decision

Date: 20 1 1 1205             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. The Applicant’s record of service did not reflect an y NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13) warnings , non-judicial punishments , or trials by court-martial for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) . Documentation found in the Applicant’ s service record reflects he violated Article 112a of the UCMJ . 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. The NDRB did not have the Applicant’s administrative separation package to determine whether the Applicant waived rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request an administrative board .

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his discharge was unjust , because it was based on evidence fabricated by NCIS and there was no physical evidence and no positive urinalysis. The government enjoys a presumption of regularity in the conduct of its affairs. The Applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support his claim. The Applicant did not provide any evidence to support his claim that NCIS fabricated evidence against him. The Applicant’s statement alone is not proof and does not overcome the government’s presumption of regularity in this case. Therefore, the NDRB concluded that the discharge was proper and equitable. Relief denied.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his record of service as evidenced by his evaluations, awards, and rapid promotions warrant consideration for upgrading his discharge. Despite a service member’s prior record of service, certain serious offenses, even though isolated, warrant separation from the Navy to maintain proper order and discipline. Violation of Article 112a is one such offense requiring mandatory processing for administrative separation regardless of performance, grade, or time in service. This 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. However, his command did not pursue a punitive discharge, but opted instead for the more lenient administrative discharge. The NDRB found the characterization of the Applicant ’ s discharge was equitable and consistent with the characterization of discharge given others in similar circumstances. Relief denied.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant provided character references, suggesting his post-service conduct and achievements warrant consideration for upgrading his discharge. 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 documentation the Applicant submitted along with the DD Form 293 was not sufficient to evaluate his post-service character and conduct. His efforts needed to have been more encompassing. He could have provided documentation as specified in the Post-Service Conduct paragraph in the Addendum , however, c ompletion 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. 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 | 2015_Navy | ND1401603

    Original file (ND1401603.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 remain UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS and the narrative reason for separation shall remain MISCONDUCT (SERIOUS OFFENSE). ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1300349

    Original file (ND1300349.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends the Navy failed to comply with applicable regulations in his separation process.2. Since full relief was given in Issue 1, further consideration was not given on this issue, but the NDRB applauds the Applicant for his strong post-Navy accomplishments.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000506

    Original file (ND1000506.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The record, however, contains no evidence of any wrongdoing by NCIS or anyone else in the discharge process. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301233

    Original file (ND1301233.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Relief granted.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 change to.The Applicant is not eligible for further reviews by the NDRB. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801624

    Original file (ND0801624.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 companies or other financial institutions; documentation of a drug free lifestyle; continued higher education and character witness statements.The Applicant is...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200172

    Original file (ND1200172.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I recommend he be separated from the Naval Service with an Under Other Than Honorable characterization of service.” On 5 Feb 2009, the Commander, Navy Personnel Command directed that the Applicant be separated from the Navy with an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge due to Homosexual Conduct (Acts). Since the Applicant’s service records do not contain the evidence contained within the NCIS investigation reports or from the testimony presented at NJP, the NDRB could not review...

  • USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201742

    Original file (MD1201742.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to:SECRETARIAL AUTHORITY Summary of ServicePrior Service: Inactive:USMCR (DEP)19940701 - 19950625Active: 19950626- 19981009 HON Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 19981010Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: Years25 MonthsDate of Discharge:20030801Highest Rank:Length of Service: Years Months22 DaysEducation Level: AFQT:67MOS: 2336Fitness Reports: Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):Rifle...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200111

    Original file (ND1200111.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant requests that his monetary recoupment for his Naval Academy education be waived or mitigated.2. After a review of the Applicant’s service, cooperation with NCIS, misconduct that he admitted to, and recommendations from the chain of command, the Assistant Secretary of the Navy (Manpower and Reserve Affairs) assigned a General (Under Honorable Conditions)...

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801416

    Original file (MD0801416.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall MISCONDUCT (DRUG ABUSE).Discussion :().The Applicant is seeing an upgrade to his discharge characterization since his discharge for drug abuse was a result of a Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS) interview and not based on a positive urinalysis. In accordance with Marine Corps policy, all Marines (regardless of pay grade) are processed for administrative separation by reason of misconduct, due to drug abuse on the first offense.All board...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900622

    Original file (ND0900622.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In addition to requesting an upgrade in the characterization of service, the Applicant is seeking a change in the narrative reason for reentry into the military. The Board determined the characterization of service received, “Under Other Than Honorable Conditions”, was an appropriate characterization considering the length of service, UCMJ violations involved, and lack of post service documentation.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of...