Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0601083

Original file (ND0601083.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-ET3, USN
ND06-01083

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request:

Application Received:                               20 060815
Narrative Reason for Separation:
Character of Service:
Discharge Authority :                                MILPERSMAN 1910-142
Last Duty Assignment/ Command at Discharge:       FACSFAC, NAS NORTH ISLAND CA

Applicant’s Request:
         Narrative Reason change to:                NOT APPLICABLE
         Characterization chang e to:
         Review Requested :
Representation:
Issues (as summarized by NDRB):                   1. Re-enlist
                                                      2. GI Bill
                                                      3. Found not guilty at Admin Board, then discharged 1 year later.


Decision:

Date of Decision:                                             20 070719
The Discharge shall change :
                                                      MISCONDUCT (SERIOUS OFFENSE)
Regarding p ropriety , the Board found the discharge :
Regarding e quity , the Board found the discharge :
Vot e (characterization/reason)                      /
Location of Board:                                  Washington D.C.
Complete Service Record:
Complete Medical Record:
Complete Discharge Package:

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
By a vote of the Reason for Discharge shall - .

Summary of Service:

Prior Service:
Inactive: USNR (DEP)                                20000204-20000228 COG
Active:                                    NONE
Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment:                                 20000229
Years Contracted :                                   ;
Date of Discharge:                                  20051017
Length of Service:                                  05 Yrs 07 Mos 19 Days ^{Does not exclude lost time, if any.}
Time Lost During This Period:                      NONE
Days Unauthorized Absence:                         NONE
Days Confinement:                                   NONE

Education Level:
Age at this Enlistment:
AFQT:                                                 58
Highest Rate/Rank:                                   ET3

Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):
Performance :                                         3.5 (6)
Behavior :                                            2.6 (6)
OTA :                                                   3.20

Awards and Decorations (as listed on the DD Form 214):
SEA SERVICE DEPLOYMENT RIBBON, NATIONAL DEFENSE SERVICE MEDAL, GOOD CONDUCT MEDAL, ARMED FORCES EXPEDITIONARY MEDAL

Service Record Entries Related to Characterization of Service or Narrative Reason for Separation

20040603:        Applicant charged by the Department of Homeland Security, Customs and Border Protection, with drug smuggling. Items seized: TESTOPRIM-D 12 ML, DECADURABOLIN: 4ML (steroids) .

20040604 :        Charges preferred for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) Article 112a (wrongful possession of a controlled substance) 20030603 ; Article 134 (Fleeing the scene of an accident) 20040318; Article 108 (destruction of military property, Spec #1 gov vehicle, Spec #2 San Clemente Bldg) 20040318.

20040609 :        NJP for viola tion s of UCMJ referred to administrative discharge board.

20040609 :        Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with the least favorable characterization of service as under other than ho norable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.

undated :         Applicant advised of rights and having consulted with counsel, elected to appear before an Administrative Discharge Board.

undated :         An Administrative Discharge Board, found that the evidence does no support a preponderance and by unanimous vote, recommended retention .

20040106 :        Counseling: Advised of deficiency ( improper watch standing ), notified of corrective actions and assistance available.

20041019 :        An Administrativ e Discharge Board, the board did not find misconduct – drug abuse by unanimous vote and by unanimous vote recommended retention .

200506 15:        Counseling: Advised of deficiency (failed to report to air terminal for duty), notified of corrective actions and assistance available

20050706 :        Counseling: Advised of deficiency ( failed to report for CMS test ), notified of corrective actions and assistance available.

20050725 :        Counseling: Advised of deficiency ( reported to take CMS re-qual test reeking of alcohol ), notified of corrective actions and assistance available.

20050725 :        C ounseling: A dvised of deficiency ( failed CMS qualificat ion test twice, beyond maximum 2 month time limit to become qualified ), notified of corrective actions and assistance available.

20050822 :        Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with the least favorable characterization of service as general (under honorable conditions ) by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.

20050822 :        Applicant advised of rights and having consulted with counsel, elected to waive his right to a General Court Martial Convening Authority review, and elected his rights to submit statements to the separation authority and to obtain copies of documents used to support the basis for his separation.

20050923 :        Commanding Officer, Area Control and Surveillance Facility, San Diego , informed the Commander, Nav y Personnel Command of his intent to administrative ly discharge the Applicant by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse. Commanding Officer’s comments: “This case was improperly processed by the previous chain of command. I do not concur with the findings and recommendations of the Administrative Board. ET3 G_ (Applicant) was taken to non-judicial punishment for drug smuggling and an alcohol related traffic accident/incidents which occurred on San Clemente Island. The previous Commanding Officer failed to impose any punishment for the alleged offenses and ordered an administrative board for the drug-trafficking charge and failed to process for all reasons including commission of a serious offense. Additionally ET3 G_ did not receive proper screening by the command’s Drug and Alcohol Program Advisor for alcohol abuse. Since then ET3 G_ completed the Prevent course on alcohol misuse and interpersonal responsibilities. He has received counseling for poor performance, multiple failures of CMS handling procedures examinations, and for another alcohol-related incident. He continues to demonstrate a lack of maturity and reliability. ET3 is currently enrolled in alcohol rehabilitation and will be processed for Administrative Separation under Notification procedures for misconduct, commission of a serious offense. ”

20051017 :        Applicant discharged for misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense with a characterization of service as General (un der honorable condi tions).

20051027 :        Commanding Officer, Fleet Area Control and Surveillance Facility, San Diego, forwarded the administrative discharge package to CNP informing of the Applicant’s administrative discharge on 20051017 as General (under honorable conditions) by reason of Misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense . Commanding Officer’s comments: “Following Petty Officer G_’s (Applicant) 2004 NJP, he demonstrated difficulty in conforming to Navy standards. Lack of judgment, poor job performance, and additional alcohol-related incidents continued to plague him. He was provided every opportunity to correct his shortcomings, but failed to meet even the most basic standards expected of a Sailor.

Elements of Discharge: [INVOLUNTARY]

Discharge Process :
Date Notified :                                        200 40609
Reason for Discharge

Least Favorable Characterization:
Date Applicant R esponded to N otification:                 NOT FOUND IN RECORD
Rights E lected at N otification :
Consult with Counsel
Administrative Board
Obtain Copies
Submit Statement(s) (date)
GCMCA Review

Administrative Board Date:                         UNDATED
Findings and Recommendations:                      EVIDENCE DOES NOT SUPPORT CHARGES ; Vote: 3 - 0
Separation Warranted:                               ; Vote: 3 - 0
Recommendation Regarding Separation:

Discharge Process:
Date Notified:                                       NOT FOUND IN RECORD
Reason for Discharge                                NOT FOUND IN RECORD

Least Favorable Characterization:                          NOT FOUND IN RECORD
Date Applicant Responded to Notification:                 NOT FOUND IN RECORD
Rights Elected at Notification:
Consult with Counsel                       NOT FOUND IN RECORD
Administrative Board                       NOT FOUND IN RECORD
Obtain Copies                              NOT FOUND IN RECORD
Submit Statement(s) (date)                         NOT FOUND IN RECORD
GCMCA Review                                NOT FOUND IN RECORD

Administrative Board Date:                         20041014
Findings and Recommendations:                      BOARD DID NOT FIND MISCONDUCT–DRUG ABUSE; VOTE 3 - 0
Separation Warranted:                               ; Vote: 3 - 0
Recommendation Regarding Separation:


Discharge Process:
Date Notified:                                       20050819
Reason for Discharge

Least Favorable Characterization:
Date Applicant Responded to Notification:                 20050822
Rights Elected at Notification:
Consult with Counsel
Administrative Board
Obtain Copies
Submit Statement(s) (date)
GCMCA Review

Discharge directed by (date):                       COMMANDING OFFICER 20051027
Narrative reason directed :
Characterization directed:                                  GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)
Date Applicant Discharged:                         20051007

Additional Information Considered by Board

Type of d ocumentation submitted by t he Applicant and considered by the Board

        Document Type                                        #Pages
Related to Period of Service Under Review :
         Service/Medical Record :                            15
         Other Period of Service:                                    0
Related to Post-Service Period:
         Community Service :                                   0
         Education :                                           0
         Employment :                                          0
         Health /Medical :                                     0
         Character Statements:                               0
         Criminal Records Checks:                                    0
         Additional Statements from Applicant:             0
Other Documentation      (Describe Below)                 0

Total Number of Pages:                            15

Discussion

Issues 1 (re-enlist) and 2 (GI Bill) : either which the Board cannot form the basis of relief for the Applicant, or the Board does not have the authority to grant the relief for which the Applicant petitioned. The Applicant is directed to the Addendum regarding .

Decisional Issues:

Issue 3 (found not guilty at admin board then discharged 1 year later , ): In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of Government affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant. The Applicant contends that he was found innocent at an Administrative discharge board then discharged one year later for the same offense. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Service Record Entries, Medical Record Entries, Elements of Discharge and evid ence submitted by the Applicant. T he Board found the Applicant’s Administrative Discharge boards only reviewed the drug charges and therefore did not find him innocent of the violations of UCMJ Article 134 (fleeing the scene of and accident and destruction of military property). E ach violation is considered the “commission of a serious offense”, the misconduct for which the Applicant was discharged. For t he information of the Applicant an administrative discharge is not punishment , the decision to administratively discharge a servicemember is made independently of and does not require adjudication at court martial or nonjudicial punishment. The characterization of service is a description of the total service provided during the members enlistment. When the service of a member of the U.S. Navy has been honest and faithful, it is appropriate to characterize that service as honorable. A General ( under honorable conditions ) d ischarge is warranted when significant negative aspects of a member’s conduct or performance of duty outweigh the positive aspects of the member’s military record. The Applicant’s service was marred by five counseling’s for poor performance, multiple failures of CMS handling procedures examinations, alcohol-related incidents, a demonstrated a lack of maturity, and reliability issues . The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, reflects his willful failure to meet the requirements of his contract with the U.S. Navy and falls far short of that required for an upgrade of his characterization of s ervice.

Pertinent Regulation/Law

A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 11, effective 26 April 2005 until Present, Article 1910-142, SEPARATION BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT - COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE .

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 .

ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant

Complaint Procedures : If you believe that 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 . 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 : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years from the 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. If a former member has been discharged for more than 15 years, has already been granted a personal appearance hearing or has otherwise exhausted his 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 Veterans Administration determines eligibility for post-service benefits, not the Naval Discharge Review Board. 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 Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational opportunities. Regulations limit the Board’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 Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) can make changes to reenlistment codes. Additionally, the Board 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 subsequently is processed for an administrative involuntary separation for misconduct, the disability evaluation is suspended. The Physical Evaluation Board case remains in suspense pending the outcome of the non-disability proceedings. If the action includes either a punitive or administrative discharge for misconduct, 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 “PTSD.” Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records can grant this type of narrative reason change.

Automatic Upgrades - There is no law or regulation, which provides that an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in civilian life subsequent to leaving Naval service. The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge 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. Examples of documentation that may be provided to the Board include proof of educational pursuits, verifiable employment records, documentation of community service, credible evidence of a substance free lifestyle and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities.

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 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.

Board Membership: The names and votes of the members of the 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 | 2006_Marine | MD0600432

Original file (MD0600432.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant understands that the separation authority may disapprove his request for a general discharge and award him an other than honorable characterization of service.020223: Medical Division, NAVCONBRIG MIRAMAR, San Diego, CA confinement evaluation.020225: Counseling: Advised of deficiencies in performance and conduct (Conviction at a summary court martial held on 020222, at Spt Bn, RTR, MCRD San Diego, CA), and advised being processed for administrative discharge action.Applicant chose...
NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00220

Original file (ND01-00220.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ND01-00220 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 001215, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. Award: Forfeiture $300 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 30 days.991110: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of alcohol rehabilitation failure, misconduct due to commission of a serious offense and a pattern of misconduct. ...
NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600838

Original file (ND0600838.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. ), notified of corrective actions and assistance available.960910: Counseling: Advised of deficiency (Violation of UCMJ Article 92: Failure to obey a lawful order or regulation. Applicant notified that least favorable characterization of servicepossible was as under other than honorable conditions.Not dated: Applicant advised of rights and having consulted with...
NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0601011

Original file (ND0601011.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). Command currently separating member from USN for drug abuse.950302: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with the least favorable characterization of service as under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse, misconduct due to commission of a serious offense and misconduct due to a...
NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600156

Original file (ND0600156.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable and the Narrative Reason for Separation be changed. Character, Narrative Reason, and Authority of Discharge (at time of issuance):UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT, authority: MILPERSMAN, Article 1910-140 (formerly 3630600). The Applicant can provide documentation to support post-service accomplishments or any other evidence related to the...
NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00681

Original file (ND00-00681.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION BACK THEN I WAS STILL GUN-HO AT THE TIME AND HAD ONE MISTAKE (19 JUN 1986 EVENT) ON MY RECORD. ALSO, MY DISCHARGE WAS BASED ON ONE INCIDENT OF COCAINE USE DURING THE TIME I WAS IN THE NAVY THE MAJORITY OF EVENTS WERE THAT I WAS DRINKING WHICH IS LEGAL AND NEVER USED UNTIL THAT LAST ISSUE.
NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600813

Original file (ND0600813.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. ” 910614: BUPERS denied approval of recommendation for separation with characterization of service as under other than honorable conditions. The Applicant may, however, petition the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR), 2 Navy Annex, Washington, DC 20370-5100, concerning a change in the characterization of Naval service, if he desires further review of his case.
NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500831

Original file (ND0500831.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. 890106: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence from 0730, December 30, 1988 to 2155, December 31, 1988. The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of discharge.
NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600086

Original file (ND0600086.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. I therefore strongly recommend that EMFN G_ (Applicant) be separated from the naval service and that he receives an Other Than Honorable characterization of service.”010523: Commander, Amphibious Group TWO, authorize the Commanding Officer, USS BATAAN (LHD 5) that the Applicant will be discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct. The names,...
USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600139

Original file (MD0600139.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. My error in judgment had scarred my otherwise exemplarity record.” Documentation In addition to the service and medical records, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant’s DD Form 214 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USMCR (DEP) 20020610 -...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0601083

Similar Decisions