Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1102093
Original file (ND1102093.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-ASAN, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20110908
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)        19990417 - 19990523     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 19990524     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20030501      Highest Rank/Rate: AS3
Length of Service : Y ear s M onth s 08 D a ys
Education Level:        AFQT: 47
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 3.8 ( 4 )      Behavior: 3.8 ( 4 )        OTA: 3.61

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      GCM NDSM

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP: 1

- 20030320 :      Specifics NFIR [Extracted from the Applicant’s statement dated 20110720]
         Awarded: RIR FOP RESTR Suspended:

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

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), 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.        The Applicant seeks an upgrade in order to qualify for the G.I. Bill.
2.       The Applicant seeks an upgrade for medical benefits.
3.       The Applicant contends his discharge was based on an isolated incident in four years of service.
4.       The Applicant contends he was made an example of because he had accused the E xecutive O fficer of assault and because he is African - American.
5.       The Applicant believes his post-service conduct is worthy of consideration.
Decision

Date: 20 1 2 0725             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 nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for violation(s) of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ ) (details were not found in his service record) . The Applicant did not have a pre-service waiver for illicit drug use, but in his statement to his Congressman and to the NDRB, he admits to battling drug abuse for years prior to entering the Navy. The Applicant was administratively processed for separation by his command due to drug abuse. Based on the Article 112a violation (Wrongful use, possession of a controlled substance) , processing for administ rative separation is mandatory. The NDRB did not have the Applicant’s administrative separation package to determine whether or not the Applicant waived his rights to consult with a qualified counsel and submit a written statement . The Applicant has an HKK separation code on his DD Form 214 , which indicates he waived his right to request an administrative board.

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant seeks an upgrade in order to qualify for the G.I. Bill. 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.

: (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 his discharge was based on an isolated incident in four years of service. Certain serious offenses , even though isolated, warrant separation from the service to maintain proper order and discipline. Violation of Article 112a is one such offense requiring mandatory processing for administrative separation regardless of grade , performance, awards, 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. The command did not pursue a punitive discharge but opted instead for the more lenient administrative discharge. The NDRB determined an upgrade would be inappropriate. Relief denied.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends he was made an example of because he had accused the E xecutive O fficer of assault and because he is African - American. There is no evidence in the record nor does the Applicant provide any proof that he was assaulted or treated unjustly by his command during his enlistment or during the discharge process. The NDRB determined an upgrade would be inappropriate. Relief denied.


5: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant believes his post-service conduct is worthy of consideration. The Applicant provided several reference letters and proof of a drug - free lifestyle. 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. The characterization of service received was appropriate considering the length of service and UCMJ violation. 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), 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 | MD1000009

    Original file (MD1000009.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant acknowledged his complete understanding of the Marine Corps Policy Concerning Illegal Use of Drugs, in writing, on 24 September 2007.The basis for the Applicant’s separation was a positive urinalysis test for cocaine while under temporary additional duty orders to deploy to Iraq with a different command than his parent command. The Applicant acknowledged his understanding in writing and elected to seek counsel and requested an administrative hearing board be held.After a...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1400906

    Original file (ND1400906.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101455

    Original file (ND1101455.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    : (Nondecisional) The Applicant seeks a change in his RE-code in order to reenlist into the Armed Forces.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. 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,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1002176

    Original file (ND1002176.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. A request for a waiver can be submitted during the processing of a formal application for reenlistment through a recruiter.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries and the hardship discharge process, the Board found the discharge was proper but not equitable at the time of discharge.With no...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201050

    Original file (ND1201050.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 | 2011_Navy | ND1102049

    Original file (ND1102049.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. A request for a waiver can be submitted during the processing of a formal application for reenlistment through a recruiter. Additionally, the NDRB does not have the authority to change a narrative reason for separation to one indicating a medical disability or...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200914

    Original file (ND1200914.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. The Applicant exercised his right to an administrative separation board, which found by a vote of 3-0 that the Applicant was guilty of misconduct due to drug abuse, 2-1 that he should be separated from the Navy but that the separation should be suspended for the remainder of the Applicant’s enlistment, and 3-0 that the characterization should be General. ” Additional Reviews...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901831

    Original file (ND0901831.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: Substance Abuse: Criminal Records: Family/Personal Status: Community Service: References: Additional Statements: From Applicant: From/To Representation:From/ToCongress member:Other Documentation: DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200522

    Original file (ND1200522.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Authority for Discharge:MILPERSMAN1910-182 [disposition of enlisted personnel disenrolled from a navy officer candidate program]Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Summary of ServicePrior Service: Inactive:NONE Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20081118Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20090702Highest Rank/Rate: OCUI2Length of Service: Inactive: Year(s) Month(s) 22...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0902257

    Original file (ND0902257.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. ” 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.