Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101837
Original file (ND1101837.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-ABEAN, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20110729
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)        20011017 - 20011218     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20011219     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20070122      Highest Rank/Rate: ABE3
Length of Service: Y ear s M onth s 18 D a ys
Education Level:        AFQT: 34
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 4.0 ( 2 )      Behavior: 3.5 ( 2 )        OTA: 3.50

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):     

Period s of UA/ C ONF : UA: 20050502 - 20061127, 574 days. CONF:

NJP :

- 20050208 :      Article (Absence without leave 20041116 - 2004120 6 , 21 days)
         Awarded:       Suspended:

S CM : SPCM: C C :

Retention Warning Counseling :

- 20050208 :       For CO’s NJP held on 20050208 for violation of A rticle 86, U nauthorized absence from 20041116 to 20041206.

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

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

          “ 2004 NOV 16-2004 DEC 06; 2005 MAY 02-2006 NOV 27 ”
        
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 31 May 2005 until Present, Article 1910-106, SEPARATION IN LIEU OF TRIAL BY COURT-MARTIAL.

B. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part IV, Para 403m(7)(b), Presumption Concerning Court-Martial Specifications .
C . 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 contends that his back pain was a contributing factor in his misconduct.
2.       Post-service conduct.

Decision

Date: 20 1 2 0904             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 included one NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13) warning and one non-judicial punishment (NJP) for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article (Absence without leave 20041116 - 20041206, 21 days ) . The Applicant also entered an extended period of unauthorized absence from 2 May 2005 until 27 November 2006 , totaling 574 days. The NDRB did not have the Applicant’s separation in lieu of trial request, however , in order for the Applicant to be separated in lieu of trial by court-martial , he must have the opportunity to consult with a qualified counsel, admit guilt for violation(s) of the UCMJ, and request to be separated in lieu of trial by court-martial to the C onvening A uthority.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends that his back pain was a contributing factor in h is misconduct. The Applicant further contends he attempted to use his chain of command, medical personnel, and the chaplain to help relieve the pain and stresses suffered after his injury. W hen reviewing a discharge, the NDRB does consider the extent to which a medical problem might affect an Applicant’s performance and ability to conform to the military’s standards of conduct and discipline. However, the NDRB generally does not consider the circumstances surrounding the Applicant’s stated condition or diagnosis to be of sufficient nature to excuse the Applicant’s misconduct. In this specific case, the Applicant had unauthorized absences of 21 and 574 days. After a complete review of the Applicant’s service records, the NDRB determined that his discharge was both proper and equitable. Relief denied.

Issue 2: (Decisional) (Equity) RELIEF NOT WARRANTED. The Applicant submitted five character references and proof of no criminal involvement since his discharge. The NDRB considers 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. The Applicant could have provided documentation as detailed in the Post-Service Conduct paragraph in the Addendum , however, completion of these items 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 establishes that the in-service misconduct was an aberration. To warrant an upgrade, the Applicant’s post-service efforts need to be more encompassing. T he Board determined that the documentation submitted by the Applicant does not demonstrate if in-service misconduct was an aberration. The characterization of service received was appropriate considering the length of service and UCMJ violations. 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 T herefore, 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), 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

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1001723

    Original file (MD1001723.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 remain COMPLETION OF REQUIRED ACTIVE SERVICE. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at...

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1000271

    Original file (MD1000271.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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.However,the Board did complete 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 6105 counseling warningand for of the UCMJ:...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700085

    Original file (ND0700085.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) found that the governments actions were proper and equitable in administratively processing this case.Issue 3 ().The Applicant contends that his problems in the Navy can be attributed to his "Youth and Immaturity." 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1301643

    Original file (MD1301643.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Types of Documents Submitted/reviewedRelated 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/ToCongress member: Pertinent Regulation/Law A. Issue 4: (Decisional)...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801128

    Original file (ND0801128.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 Enclosure (5) of that Instruction to the Joint Service Review Activity, OUSD (P&R) PI-LP, The...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901794

    Original file (MD0901794.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant was awarded a Bad Conduct Discharge characterization of service and was discharged promptly from the Marine Corps. The NDRB determined that clemency is not warranted.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, service record entries, discharge process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found clemency was not warranted and the sentence awarded the Applicant at his court-martial was appropriate for...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700752

    Original file (MD0700752.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Mandatory processing for separation is required for Marines who abuse illegal drugs. 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 ServicePrior Service: Inactive: USMCR (DEP)20000927 - 20001112Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20001113Years Contracted:; Extension: Date of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200329

    Original file (ND1200329.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 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 has been conducted, former members are...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0701109

    Original file (ND0701109.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Absent any documentation provided by the Applicant for the Board to consider, the Board determined that the Applicant’s service record did not mitigate the misconduct that resulted in the characterization of discharge. 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)19990318...

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1000281

    Original file (MD1000281.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB conducted a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s pre-service waiver; written acknowledgment of the Marine Corps Policy for Drug Abuse; his Summary of Service; Service Record Entries; Medical records; and the Verbatim Record of Trial by Special Court-Martial along with the Applicant’s contentions. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application...