ex-LTJG, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20100105
Characterization of Service Received:  
Narrative Reason for Discharge:  
Authority for Discharge:  SECNAVINST 1920.6B

Applicant’s Request:	Characterization change to:	
	Narrative Reason change to:	

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive:	USNR (DEP)	20020515 - 20020621  	Active:	 20020622 - 20020919 HON

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment:  20020920	Age at Enlistment:  
Period of Enlistment:   Years   Extension
Date of Discharge:  20051031	Highest Rank/Rate:  LTJG
Length of Service:   Year(s)     Month(s)   11 Day(s)
Education Level:  	AFQT:  NFIR
Evaluation Marks:	Performance:  3.0 (2)	Behavior:  3.5 (2)	OTA:  3.34

Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):	Rifle  Pistol   NMCAM      

Periods of UA/CONF:       NJP:       SCM:       SPCM:       CC:  

Retention Warning Counseling:  

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.

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB)
DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT

Applicant’s Issues

1.	The Applicant contends his characterization of service is inequitable, because his misconduct was an isolated incident. 
2.	The Applicant contends the quality of his service to the country deserves better than an Under Other Than Honorable characterization.
3.    The Applicant requests the NDRB consider  post-service conduct as a basis for a more thorough understanding of his performance and conduct during the period of service under review.
Decision

Date:  20110224		Location:  Washington D.C.	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 evidence submitted by the Applicant.  The record shows the Applicant requested separation in lieu of trial by court-martial (SILT) based on charges of possession and use of steroids.  In order 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 offense(s) for which they were charged and must admit their guilt.  Members 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, and that they might expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life in situations where the type of service rendered or the character of discharge received may have a bearing.  The Applicant’s request for SILT was approved, and he was subsequently separated with an Under Other Than Honorable characterization of service.  

:  (Decisional) ()  .  The Applicant contends his characterization of service is inequitable, because his misconduct was an isolated incident.  The Applicant further contends the quality of his service to the country deserves better than an Under Other Than Honorable characterization.  Despite a service member’s prior record of service, certain serious offenses, even though isolated, warrant separation from the  in order to maintain proper order and discipline.  Violation of Article 112a (Wrongful use or possession of controlled substances) is one such offense requiring mandatory processing for administrative separation regardless of grade or time in service.  This usually results in an unfavorable characterization of discharge or, at a maximum, a punitive discharge and confinement if adjudicated and awarded as part of a sentence by a special or general court-martial.  The Applicant was charged with violation of Article 112a.  However, his command did not pursue a court-martial and punitive discharge but opted instead for a more lenient course in accepting the Applicant’s request for SILT.  The NDRB determined an upgrade would be inappropriate.

:  (Decisional) ()  .  The Applicant requests the NDRB consider  post-service conduct as a basis for a more thorough understanding of his performance and conduct during the period of service under review.  The Applicant states he has worked in Iraq as a contractor in support of U.S. efforts there.  Additionally, he states he currently works renovating Navy housing.  The Applicant provided no documentation to support his post-service conduct.  The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge.  However, there is no law or regulation that provides an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in civilian life subsequent to leaving the service.  Documentation that could help support a post-service conduct upgrade includes, but is not limited to: a verifiable continuous employment record; marriage and children’s birth certificate (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; attending or completing higher education (official transcripts); and documentation of a drug-free lifestyle.  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 previous in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member’s overall character.  Due to the lack of documentation and evidence submitted by the Applicant in support of his issue, the NDRB found an upgrade would be inappropriate.

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.  The Applicant is directed to the Addendum, specifically the paragraphs titled Additional Reviews, Automatic Upgrades, and Post-Service Conduct.

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), 2 Navy Annex, Washington, DC 20370-5100 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