Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200556
Original file (ND1200556.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-ETSA, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20120112
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)        19980220 - 19980224     Active:   19980225 - 20010225 HON

Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Current Enlistment: 20010226     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20010710      Highest Rank/Rate: ET3
Length of Service: Year(s) Month(s) 14 D ay(s)
 Education Level:        AFQT: 84
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: NFIR         Behavior: NFIR   OTA: NFIR

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      NEM

Lost time per DD214: 20010426 to 20010524, 29 days, 20010525 to 20010710, 46 days
NJP :     SPCM:    CC:      Retention Warning Counseling:

S CM :

- 20010529:      Article (Absence without leave)
         Article 90 (Assaulting or willfully disobeying superior commissioned officer)
         Sentence: (Pre-trial: 20010524-20010528, 5 days)

- 20010604 :      Article (Wrongful use, possession, etc., of controlled substance)
         Article 131 (Perjury)
         Sentence:

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

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

          “ ”
         
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:                  Other Documentation:    
                  Additional Statements:
         From Applicant:           From/To Representation:           From/To Congress member:        

Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A. The Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 31, effective 12 February 2001 until 15 July 2001, 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 contends the U. S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) reviewed and approved his eligibility fo r v eterans benefits based on his Honorable period of service from 25 February 1998 to 25 February 2001 , even though his DD Form 214 reflects he was discharged on 10 July 2001 with an Other Than Honorable characterization. He further contends the VA recommended that he request to have his DD Form 214 be corrected .

Decision

Date: 20 1 2 1220             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. T he 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 i nclude d two summary courts-martial for violation s of the UCMJ : Article 86 (Absence without leave), Article 90 (Assaulting or willfully disobeying superior commissioned officer, 1 specification), Article 112a (Wrongful use of controlled substance, 1 specification), and Article 131 ( Perjury, 1 specification) . Based on the offenses, command administratively processed for separation. Based on the Article 112a violation, processing for administrative separation is mandatory . 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 .

: (Non - decisional) The Applicant contends the VA reviewed and approved his eligibility for v eterans benefits based on his Honorable period of service from 25 February 1998 to 25 February 2001 , even though his DD Form 214 reflects he was discharged on 10 July 2001 with an Other Than Honorable characterization . He further contends the VA recommended that he request to have his DD Form 214 be corrected. The NDRB conducted a thorough review of the Applicant’s DD Form 214 and found it to be correct, with the exception of Block 24 (Character of Service), which should read, “UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS.” According to Navy regulations, a DD Form 214 will not be issued to personnel who are discharge d for immediate reenlistment on active duty. The Applicant received an Honorable discharge at the completion of his first enlistment on 25 February 2001 and immediately reenlisted for a second enlistment. In his second enlistment, he was found guilty of numerous serious offenses at two summary courts-martial and was properly and equitably discharged on 10 July 2001 Under Other Than Honorable Conditions for Misconduct (Drug Abuse). For members who have previous ly enlisted without being issued a DD Form 214, and who are being separated with any discharge characterization except Honorable, the continuous period of Honorable service will be noted in Block 18 on the DD Form 214. Block 18 on the Applicant’s DD Form 214 correctly accounts for his first enlistment of honorable service that ended on 25 February 2001 . Therefore, other than the correction to Block 24, no other change is required. The NDRB will recommend to Commander, Navy Personnel Command, that the DD Form 214 be corrected as appropriate.

As to the determination of veterans benefits, the 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. Decisions reached by the VA to determine if former servicemembers rate certain VA benefits do not affect previous discharge decisions made by the Navy. The criteria used by the VA in determining whether a former servicemember is eligible for benefits are different than that used by the Navy when determining a member’s discharge characterization. The Applicant was properly and equitably discharged in his second enlistment, and his DD Form 214, with the exception of a minor error in Block 24, is correct.



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

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700664

    Original file (ND0700664.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The record documents, the Applicant’s in-service use of illegal drugs which is the basis for the 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)19991211 - 19991222Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 19991223Years Contracted:;...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1500571

    Original file (ND1500571.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant contends that he was not given the option to go through a discharge board while being processed out of the Navy. ” 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001018

    Original file (ND1001018.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, the verbatim transcript record of trial by Special Court-Martial, and the discharge process, the NDRB determined that Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall BAD CONDUCT DISCHARGE and the narrative reason for separation shall remain . ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance...

  • USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1401003

    Original file (MD1401003.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 | 2012_Navy | ND1200435

    Original file (ND1200435.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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1400616

    Original file (MD1400616.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    During the Applicant’s 3 years and 7 months of service, he was found guilty of violating multiple serious UCMJ articles at four NJPs, received five retention warnings, and met the requirements to be administratively separated for a Pattern of Misconduct, Commission of a Serious Offense, and Drug Abuse. ” 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1301750

    Original file (MD1301750.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, and record entries, 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 eligible for a...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0902149

    Original file (ND0902149.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. 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1301518

    Original file (MD1301518.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 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 | 2010_Navy | ND1000826

    Original file (ND1000826.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant desires to reenlist in the military. 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...