Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201097
Original file (ND1201097.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-AN, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20120417
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)        20020925 - 20021104     Active:            20021105 - 20040421 HON

Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Current Enlistment: 20040422     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20060503      Highest Rank/Rate: AN
Length of Service: Year(s) Month(s) 29 D ay(s)
 Education Level:        AFQT: 34
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 3.0 ( 2 )      Behavior: 2.5 ( 2 )        OTA: 2.84

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Pistol

Periods of UA : 20050530 - 20050601, 2 days; 20051015 - 2 0051115, 31 days ; 20051206 - 20060105 , 29 days

NJP :

- 20030813 :      Article (Absence without leave , 2 specifications )
         Article (Failure to obey order or regulation , 2 specifications )
         Awarded: Suspended:

S CM :    SPCM:    C C :

Retention Warning Counseling:

- 20030810 :      For violation UCMJ Article s 86 (2) and 92 (2).

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

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

          “ 03 04 27 ”
          “ 30MAY05 TO 01JUN05, 15OCT05 TO 15NOV05 ”

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. 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 seeks an upgrade to qualify for Department of Veterans Affairs ( VA ) benefits.
2.       The Applicant contends his discharge was too harsh .
3.       The Applicant contends his misconduct was due to personal problems and racial bias .
Decision

Date: 20 1 3 0301             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 sta ndards of equity and propriety. The Applicant’s record of service included NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13) warning, for o f the Uniform Code of Mili tary Justice (UCMJ): Article 86 ( Absence without leave, 2 specifications) , Article 92 ( Failure to obey order or regulation, 2 specifications) , and three periods of unadjudicated UA from 20050530 - 20050601 ( 2 days ), 20051015 - 20051115 ( 31 days ), and 20051206 - 20060105 ( 29 days ) . Based on the offenses committed by the Applicant, command referred charges to a Special C ourt - Martial. The Applicant then submitted a request to be separated in lieu of trial by court-martial (SILT). Per regulations, to attain approval for a SILT request, service members must have been afforded the opportunity to consult with a qualified counsel and submit a written statement. They must also fully understand the elements of the offenses for which they were charged, and they must admit their guilt. They further certify a complete understanding of the negative consequences of their actions and that characterization of service could be Under Other Than Honorable Conditions, which might deprive them of virtually all veterans benefits based upon their current enlistment.

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant seeks an upgrade to qualify for VA 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 too harsh . The NDRB reviews the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge individually, on a case-by-case basis. If such a review reveals an impropriety or inequity, relief is in order. Regulations permit relief on equitable grounds if the Applicant’s discharge is inconsistent with standards of discipline of the Naval Service. Based upon available records, nothing indicates that the Applicant’s discharge was in any way inconsistent with the standards of discipline in the United States Navy. A preponderance of the evidence reviewed supports the conclusion that the Applicant committed multiple offense s , that separation from the Naval Service was appropriate, and that an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge was warranted. Relief denied.

 : (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his misconduct was due to personal problems and racial bias . The NDRB recognizes that serving in the military is challenging. Most service members, however, serve honorably and therefore earn their Honorable or General discharges. In fairness to those service members, 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 service members who undergo personal problems during their enlistment s , such as the Navy Chaplain, Navy Relief Society, Family Advocacy Programs, or even the Red Cross. Additionally, there is no evidence in the record, nor did the Applicant provide any, to show that racial basis existed at his command or was used against him. The NDRB determined personal problems and racial bias were not mitigating factors in 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 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 | 2015_Marine | MD1500426

    Original file (MD1500426.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s record of service included 6105 counseling warnings; for of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 86 (Absence without leave), Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation; 2 specifications), and Article 107 (False official statements); and for of the UCMJ: Article 86 (Absence without leave; 3 specifications), Article 91 (Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer; 2 specifications), Article 92 (Failure to obey...

  • USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1400742

    Original file (MD1400742.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB determined the Applicant did not submit any documentation, nor is there anything in his records, to warrant clemency. ” 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 | 2007_Navy | ND0700283

    Original file (ND0700283.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant claims that his discharge was based on a racism directed toward him by his Commanding Officer rather than on an assessment of his misconduct, and claims that others committing more serious misconduct were not discharge. Discharge Process Date Notified: NOT FOUND IN RECORDReason for Discharge:Least Favorable Characterization: Date Applicant Responded to Notification:NOT FOUND IN RECORD Rights Elected at Notification: Consult with Counsel Obtain Copies of Documents Submit...

  • USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1500114

    Original file (MD1500114.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. The NDRB cannot grant a change based solely on this issue; however, the Applicant should be aware that the VA has announced special VA enrollment access for PTSD and mental health treatment to combat veterans discharged under other than dishonorable conditions. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal...

  • USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1400539

    Original file (MD1400539.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: DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1300125

    Original file (ND1300125.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    of a controlled substance) on 5 October 2005, which is the day before she provided a urine sample for a random drug test. ” 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.

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901367

    Original file (MD0901367.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant pled guilty to two specifications of UA in excess of thirty days with one UA period ending in apprehension.A pretrial agreement limited the punishment that might have otherwise been adjudged for the charges.The NDRB determined that the sentence adjudged was not overly harsh considering the severity of the offenses. The desire for a better life, by itself, is not sufficient reason for the NDRB to grant clemency.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to...

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0601044

    Original file (MD0601044.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ex-LCPL, USMCMD06-01044Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request: Application Received: 20060804Narrative Reason for Separation: COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE/WAIVED BOARD Character of Service:Discharge Authority: MARCORSEPMAN 6210.6Last Duty Assignment/Command at Discharge: 8THESBN 2DFSSGApplicant’s Request:Narrative Reason change to: NONEREQUESTEDCharacterization change to:Review Requested:Representation: Decision: Date of Decision: 20070614Location of Board: Washington D.C.Complete...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700299

    Original file (MD0700299.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    20050620 Rights Elected at Notification: Consult with Counsel Obtain Copies of Documents Submit Statement(s) (date) Administrative Board Commanding Officer Recommendation (date): (20050601) SJA review (date): (20050912) Separation Authority (date): COMMANDING GENERAL, 1 ST MARINE DIVISION (20050920) Basis for discharge directed: DUE TO: Characterization directed: Date Applicant Discharged: 20050921 Types of Documents Submitted by Applicant and Considered By BoardRelated to Military Service:...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1401513

    Original file (ND1401513.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Although the Applicant’s record up to his wrongful drug abuse met the standards for Honorable service, his decision to use marijuana mandated he be processed for an administrative separation, and the Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge was 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 remain UNDER...