Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100516
Original file (ND1100516.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-SA, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20101223
Characterization of Service Received:
Narrative Reason for Discharge:
Authority for Discharge: MILPERSMAN

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

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive:         US N R (DEP)        20070712 - 20070910     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20070911     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20090605      Highest Rank/Rate: SN
Length of Service : Y ear ( s ) M onth ( s ) 26 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 42
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 3.0 ( 2 )      Behavior: 2.0 ( 2 )         OTA: 2.50

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):     

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP:

- 20090410 :      Article (Drugs)
         Awarded: Suspended:

SCM:     SPCM:    C C :      Retention Warning Counseling :

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

The NDRB did note administrative error(s) on the original DD Form 214:

                   “ 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 :        


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

Applicant’s Issues

 1.        The Applicant contends his record of service outweighs his misconduct.
2.       The Applicant contends his discharge is inequitable , because it was based on an isolated incident.
3.       The Applicant contends his depression led to his misconduct.

Decision

Date : 2012 0124             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 discharg e 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. The Board did complete a thorough review of the circumstances which led to discharge and the discharge process to ensure the pertinent standards of equity and propriety were met. The Applicant’s record of service included for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article ( , ). The Applicant a pre-service drug waiver for using marijuana prior to entering the Navy. Based on the offense 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. However, the Applicant has an HKK separation code on his DD Form 214 , which indicates he waived his right to an administrative board.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends he was an exceptional sailor that held himself to high standards and fulfilled his duties aboard ship , therefore , suggesting his record of service warrants considera tion for changing his narrative reason for discharge to “Hardship . ” 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. In April 2009, the Applicant received NJP for violating Article 112a of the UCMJ. Violation of Article 112a requires mandatory separation per the Naval Military Personnel Manual. Even though the Applicant committed a serious offense that could have resulted in a punitive discharge and confinement as the result of a special court-martial, his command did not pursue a punitive discharge but opted instead for the more lenient administrative discharge. The NDRB found the characterization was equitable and consistent with the characterization given others in similar circumstances. Relief denied.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends that his decision to wrongfully use a controlled substance was an isolated incident. C ertain 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 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 given others in similar circumstances. R elief denied.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends depression resulting from his mother’s death led to his misconduct. The Applicant’s case was considered under the pertinent standards of equity to determine if any factors in this particular case merited relief. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, s ervice re cord e ntries, and the Applicant’s statement, the Board found no evidence of a depression diagnosis (in-service or post-service) to support the Applicant’s claim. There is nothing in the record to show that the Applicant was either not responsible for his actions or should not be held accountable for his misconduct. 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, specifically the paragraphs titled Additional Reviews, Automatic Upgrades, and Post-Service Conduct .

Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A . The Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 23, effective 2 June 2008 until 9 November 2009, 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 .


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 | 2011_Navy | ND1100256

    Original file (ND1100256.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends his record of service outweighs his misconduct. ” 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1500470

    Original file (ND1500470.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    By a vote of 5-0, the NDRB found that the awarded characterization of service was inequitable and that relief in the form of an upgrade in the characterization of service to General is 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 change to GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS) and the narrative reason for...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001574

    Original file (ND1001574.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs determines eligibility for such post-service benefits, not the Naval Discharge Review Board. ” 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.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1401361

    Original file (ND1401361.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends his discharge is inequitable because he misused a prescription drug and that is not the same as drug abuse.2. ” 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,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0902409

    Original file (ND0902409.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    However, for reasons not found in the record, the Applicant was not processed for administrative separation. Therefore, the NDRB found an upgrade to Honorable is 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. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100440

    Original file (ND1100440.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. : (Decisional)() .The...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0902634

    Original file (ND0902634.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    As such, the NDRB determined that an upgrade would be inappropriate.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 .The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing for a period of fifteen years from the date of discharge. ” Additional Reviews : After a...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001876

    Original file (ND1001876.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’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.In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs unless there is...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901534

    Original file (MD0901534.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB determined an upgrade would be inappropriate.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 .The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing for a period of fifteen years from the date of discharge. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900321

    Original file (ND0900321.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s misconduct is clearly documented. ” 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. 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...