Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201214
Original file (ND1201214.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-SR, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20120504
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)        20021126 - 20030331     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20030401     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20051019      Highest Rank/Rate: RP3
Length of Service : Y ear ( s ) M onth ( s ) 19 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 72
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 3.0 ( 3 )      Behavior: 3.3 ( 3 )        OTA: 3.06

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):     

Periods of UA : 20050514 - 20050609, 27 days / C ONF :

NJP:

- 20050707 :      Article (Absence without le ave , 20050514 - 20050609, 27 days )
         Awarded: Suspended:

- 20050909 :      Art icle (Absence without leave)
         Art icle (Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer)
         Article (Wrongful use, possession, etc. of controlled substances)
         Awarded: Susp ended:

- 20051007 :      Article (Absence without leave)
         Article (Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer)
         Article (Failure to obey order or regulation)
         Awarded: Suspended:

SCM:     SPCM:    C C :      Retention Warning Counseling :

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

The NDRB did note administrative error(s) on the original DD Form 214:
“ SR ”
“ E1 ”
          “ 02 05 22 ”
“ MISCONDUCT (DRUG ABUSE) ”

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. The Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 11, effective 29 April 2005 until 1 June 2008, 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 that not getting paid but obligated to work long hours caused a n in s urmountable amount of stress.
2.       The Applicant contends his youth and immaturity led to his misconduct.
3.       The Applicant contends his post-service conduct is worthy of an upgrade.
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 discharg e 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 for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article (Absence without leave , 3 specifications ) , Article (Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer , 2 specifications ) , Article (Failure to obey order or regulation), and Article (Wrongful use, possession, etc. of controlled substances) . The Applicant a pre-service drug waiver for using marijuana prior to entering the Navy. Based on the Article 112a violation, 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 rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request an administrative board or a General Court-Martial Convening Authority review . However, the Applicant has a S eparation C ode of HKK on his DD Form 214, which indicates he waived his administrative board.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends that not getting paid but obligated to work long hours caused an insurmountable amount of stress. The Applicant provided no evidence or details why he was not paid. The NDRB was only able to determine periods of nonpayment due to the Applicant’s misconduct of being absen t without leave and subsequent forfeitures of pay awarded at his NJP s . The NDRB determined the Applicant’s failure to get paid while he was in an unauthorized absence status or from punishment awarded for misconduct are not valid reason s or excuse s to commit additional misconduct. Further, t he evidence of record did not show that the Applicant was either not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions. Relief denied.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his youth and immaturity led to his misconduct. While the Applicant may feel his youth and immaturity were the underlying causes of his misconduct, the record clearly reflects his willful misconduct and demonstrated he was unfit for further service. The evidence of record does not demonstrate the Applicant was not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions. Relief denied.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his post-service conduct is worthy of an upgrade. 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 provided a personal statement , college diploma , and college transcripts . 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. The 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 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 | 2009_Navy | ND0901288

    Original file (ND0901288.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    ex-ETSR, USN Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request Application Received: 20090409 Characterization of Service Received: Narrative Reason for Discharge: (SERIOUS OFFENSE) Authority for Discharge: MILPERSMAN Applicant’s Request: Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USNR (DEP) 20050126 - 20050608 Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20050609 Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: Years Extension Date of...

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1102132

    Original file (MD1102132.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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1002076

    Original file (MD1002076.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000584

    Original file (ND1000584.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Separation Authority determined that the preponderance of the evidence supported both reasons for discharge and that separation from the Naval Service was warranted; as such, he directed that the Applicant be separated and that the basis for separation on the DD Form214 be Pattern of Misconduct. The Separation Authority further determined that the Applicant should be discharged with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization of his service and that he receive an RE-4...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700820

    Original file (MD0700820.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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)20040122 - 20040919Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20040920Years Contracted:Date of Discharge:2005701Length of Service: 01 Yrs 10Mths12 DysLost Time:Days UA: Days Confined: Education Level: Age at...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700103

    Original file (MD0700103.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USMCR (DEP)20021122 - 20030622Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20030623Years Contracted:; Extension: Date of Discharge:20050622 Length of Service: 02 Yrs 00Mths00 DysLost Time:Days UA: Days Confined: Education Level: Age at Enlistment:AFQT: 57MOS:6672Highest Rank:Proficiency/Conduct marks (# of occasions): N/A/N/AFitness reports: Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):RIFLE MARKSMAN BADGE, SEA SERVICE DEPLOYMENT RIBBON,...

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1002096

    Original file (MD1002096.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.

  • USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201470

    Original file (MD1201470.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The administrative board determined by vote of 3-0 that the preponderance of the evidence supported Misconduct - Pattern of Misconduct, by vote of 2-1 that she should be administratively separated with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge, and by 3-0 that her discharge be suspended for 12 months. With two NJPs for multiple serious offenses and four retention warnings, two of which were for exhibiting a pattern of misconduct, the Applicant warranted separation for Misconduct -...

  • USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201266

    Original file (MD1201266.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant also acknowledged his complete understanding of the Marine Corps Policy Concerning Illegal Use of Drugs on 5 June 2002.Despite an Article 112a violation, which requires mandatory administrative processing, the Applicant’s command allowed him to finish his enlistment, and he was discharged at his End of Active Obligated Service with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization of service.In accordance with Paragraph 1004 of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200270

    Original file (ND1200270.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Based on the offenses committed by the Applicant, command administratively processed for separation. 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...