Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1300193
Original file (ND1300193.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-AKAR, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20121026
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)        20000828 - 20001015     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20001016     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20031218      Highest Rank/Rate: AKAA
Length of Service: Y ear( s ) M onth( s ) 01 D a y ( s )
 Education Level:        AFQT: 59
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: NFIR         Behavior: NFIR   OTA: NFIR

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      NONE

NJP :     S CM :             CC:      Retention Warning Counseling :

SPCM:

- 20020606 :       Art icle (Absence without leave, 20020127-2002031 3 , 46 days )
         Art icle (Failure to obey order or regulation)
         Article (Wrongful use, possession, etc. of controlled substances , 5 specifications )
         Sentence : 130 days (20020315-20020627, 105 days)

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 8 September 2004, Article 5815-010, Executing a Dishonorable or Bad Conduct Discharge.

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)(a), 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 he did not know that he could have received an Honorable discharge if he did not go on appellate leave.
2.       The Applicant contends his youth and immaturity led to his misconduct.
3.       The Applicant contends his post-service conduct warrants an upgrade.
Decision

Date : 20 1 3 0724             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. With respect to a discharge adjudged by a court-martial case, 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. In response to the Applicant’s clemency request, relevant and material facts stated in a court-martial specification are presumed by the NDRB to be established facts . The Applicant’s case was considered under the pertinent standards of equity to determine if any factors in this particular case merited clemency. T he Board did complete a thorough review of the circumstances that led to his discharge and the discharge process to ensure his discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety. The Applicant’s record of service included for of the UCMJ: Article (Absence without leave, 20020127-20020313, 46 days) , Article (Failure to obey order or regulation) , and Article (Wrongful use, possession, etc. of controlled substances , 5 specifications ). The Applicant’s service record documents a punitive conviction and punishment, as adjudged by a Special Court-Martial, on 0 6 June 200 2 . A qualified legal defense counsel represented the Applicant throughout the trial by Special Court-Martial process. Given the facts of the case, the Special Court-Martial awarded the Applicant a Bad Conduct Discharge , reduction to E-1, and confinement for a period of 1 3 0 days. The case was submitted for review to the U.S. Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals without specific assignments of error; it was reviewed and the findings were affirmed on 16 December 200 3 . Subsequently, the Navy Marine Corps Appellate Leave Activity ordered the Bad Conduct Discharge executed.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends he did not know that he could have received an Honorable discharge if he did not go on appellate leave. There is no regulation or law that allows a servicemember who was awarded a Bad Conduct Discharge to receive an Honorable discharge by not going on appellate leave. The purpose of appellate leave is to keep the Applicant on unpaid active duty until the appeals process reviews the punitive conviction. Once the appeals court confirmed the conviction, the Applicant was discharged with a Bad Conduct Discharge. Not going on appellate leave would not have led to an Honorable discharge. The NDRB determined the Applicant’s contention was without merit. Clemency 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. Clemency denied.






: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his post-service warrants 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 , a resume, college transcripts , and three character references . 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. Clemency 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 | ND0900057

    Original file (ND0900057.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    For the benefit of the Applicant, with respect to non-service-related administrative matters, i.e., VA benefits, educational pursuits, and especially civilian employment, an “Uncharacterized ” separation is considered the equivalent of an “Honorable ” or “General (Under Honorable Conditions) ” discharge.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000475

    Original file (ND1000475.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.Nondecisional issues: The Applicant seeks clemency in the form of an upgrade to a General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization of his service at discharge in order to be eligible to receive Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) medical benefits for himself and his family. On 29 March 1995, the Navy and Marine Corps Appellate Leave Activity ordered the Bad Conduct...

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1100053

    Original file (MD1100053.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USMCR (DEP)NONEActive: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20070212Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: Years MonthsDate of Discharge:20090720Highest Rank:Length of Service: Years Months09 DaysEducation Level: AFQT:68MOS: 1341Proficiency/Conduct Marks (# of occasions):NFIR / NFIRFitness Reports: Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):Rifle SS,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1002153

    Original file (ND1002153.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. Summary: After a thorough...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101854

    Original file (ND1101854.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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

  • NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1400731

    Original file (ND1400731.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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901152

    Original file (MD0901152.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall COURT-MARTIAL.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.With respect to a discharge adjudged by a court-martial case, the action of the NDRB is restricted to upgrades based on clemency. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible...

  • USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1401139

    Original file (MD1401139.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    of controlled substances, 2 specifications) Specification 1: On or about 20040723, wrongfully use marijuana Specification 2: On or about 20040820, wrongfully use methamphetamineSentence: 60 days 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1002106

    Original file (MD1002106.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. Paragraph 1105, DISCHARGE...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200806

    Original file (ND1200806.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB determined clemency is not warranted. ” 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.