Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101706
Original file (ND1101706.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-GSM3, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20110711
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)        19961126 - 19970617     Active:   19970618 - 20010902 HON
                                   
Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20010903     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20070329      Highest Rank/Rate: GSM2
Length of Service: Y ear s M onth s 26 D a ys
Education Level:        AFQT: 58
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 3.4 ( 8 )      Behavior: 2.5 ( 8 )        OTA: 3.04

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      NDSM GWOTSM GWOTEM SSDR (7) OSR (6) GCM (2) MUC (2) NUC NMCAM AFEM

Periods of UA : 20060821 - 20060824 (4), 20060918 - 20060925 (7)

NJP : 1
- 20060530 :       Art icle 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation)
         Article 112a (Wrongful use of controlled substances)
         Awarded: NFIR

S CM : NONE        CC: NONE         Retention Warning Counseling : NONE

SPCM: 1

- 20070314 :       Art icle 86 (Absence without leave)
         Art icle 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation , 3 specifications )
         Article 121 (Larceny and wrongful appropriation , 4 specifications )
         Article 123 (Forgery , 2 specifications )
          Sentence : RIR CONF 4 months (20061127 - 20070116 (51), 20070117 - 20070328 (72))

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

The NDRB note d an administrative error on the original DD Form 214:

          “ CONTINUOUS HONORABLE ACTIVE SERVICE FROM 19970618 UNTIL 20010902 ”
        
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. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 11, effective 26 April 2005 until 11 June 2008, Article 1910-142, SEPARATION BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT - COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE.
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 .

C. 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 s 92, 1 21 , and 123.



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

Applicant’s Issues

 1.        The Applicant seeks an upgrade for medical benefits.
2.       The Applicant contends family and financial issues were contributing factors in his misconduct.
3.       The Applicant wants an upgrade because his first enlistment was Honorable.

Decision

Date: 20 1 2 0822             Location: Washington D.C .        R epresentation : NONE

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 included one non-judicial punishment (NJP) for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation) and Article 112a (Wrongful use of controlled substances) and one S pecial C ourt- M artial for violations of the UCMJ: Article 86 (Absence without leave), Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation, 3 specifications), Article 121 (Larceny and wrongful appropriation, 4 specifications), and Article 123 (Forgery, 2 specifications). T he Applicant did not have a pre-service drug waiver for illicit drug use p rior to entering the Navy. Based on the offense s committed by the Applicant, his command administratively processed him for separation. When notified of administrative separation processing using the procedure, the Applicant waived rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request an administrative board .

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant seeks an upgrade for medical 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.
: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends family and financial issues were contributing factors in his misconduct. The NDRB recognizes that serving in the military is challenging. Most servicemembers, however, serve honorably and therefore earn their Honorable and General discharges. In fairness to those servicemembers, commanders and separation authorities are tasked to ensure that undeserving Sailors receive no higher characterization than is due. There is no evidence in the record, nor did the Applicant provide any documentation, to indicate he attempted to use the numerous services available for servicemembers who undergo personal problems during their enlistment, such as the Navy Chaplain, Mental Health professionals, Navy Relief Society, Family Advocacy Programs, or even the Red Cross. The NDRB determined the Applicant’s personal problems do not mitigate his misconduct. Relief denied.

Issue 3: (Decisional) (Propriety/Equity) RELIEF NOT WARRANTED. The Applicant wants an upgrade because his first enlistment was Honorable. Each period of enlistment is an independent obligation and characterization is determined for that specific period of time. The Applicant received an Honorable discharge for his first enlistment from 1997 to 2001. However, in his second enlistment after an NJP and Special Court-Martial, he was properly and equitably discharged with an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions characterization of service. 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 15 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), 701 South Courthouse Road, Suite 1001, Arlington, VA 22204-2490 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 | 2008_Navy | ND0801343

    Original file (ND0801343.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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801287

    Original file (ND0801287.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant contends his characterization of service should be upgraded because his discharge was unjust and lacking evidence. However, there is no evidence in the records available for review, nor has the Applicant produced any evidence or medical documentation to support the contention he was misdiagnosed by military medical personnel. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is...

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801281

    Original file (MD0801281.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 Member of Congress: Other Documentation (Describe): DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.Reenlistment opportunities 2.Employment opportunities3. ” Additional Reviews...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901019

    Original file (ND0901019.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.Wants to receive VA benefits.2. 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.Issue 2: (Decisional) () . ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801425

    Original file (ND0801425.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Additionally, it was the Applicant’s in-service performance and conduct that resulted in his 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 otherwise exhausted his opportunities before the...

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0800254

    Original file (MD0800254.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Concerning his second claim, since he already received NJP for uttering worthless checks and also received a retention warning counseling, the Applicant should have been more watchful of his account balance before he wrote additional bad checks. 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 ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant Complaint Procedures : If...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900369

    Original file (ND0900369.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB determined an upgrade founded upon the Applicant’s post-service conduct would be inappropriate.The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing andis directed to the Addendum, specifically the paragraphs concerning Additional Reviews and Automatic Upgrades .Should the Applicant feel at some later time his post-service conduct is worthy of personally presenting to the NDRB there are organizations, such as the American Legion, willing to provide guidance and assistance...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000567

    Original file (ND1000567.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. Relief 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900194

    Original file (MD0900194.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall MISCONDUCT.Discussion : either which the Board cannot form the basis of relief for the Applicant, or the Board does not have the authority to grant the relief for which the Applicant petitioned. The NDRB determined 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 ADDENDUM: Information for...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1300851

    Original file (ND1300851.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...