Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700499
Original file (ND0700499.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
ex-AMSAA, USN
ND07-00499
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20070306   Characterization Received:
Narrative Reason: MISCONDUCT DRUG ABUSE (USE)    Authority: MILPERSMAN 3630620

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

Applicant’s Issues:       1. VA Benefits
                           2. Post Service – Changed life and completed drug treatment program.


Decision

 By a vote of the Characterization shall .     
By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall MISCONDUCT .
Date: 20 071108             Location: Washington D.C          R epresentation :


Discussion

 Issue 1 : 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 .

Issue 2 ( ): The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. However, 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 the civilian life subsequent to leaving the service. Normally, to permit relief a procedural impropriety or inequity must have been found to have existed during the period of enlistment in question. Outstanding post-service conduct to the extent that 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. The Applicant provided a statement in his letter to the board in which he states that he has changed his life and completed an intense drug treatment program in support of his post-service claim. The Applicant's efforts need to be more encompassing than those provided. For example, the Applicant could have produced a certificate of completion from the drug rehabilitation center, negative drug tests since completion, evidence of continuing educational pursuits, a verifiable employment record, documentation of community service, and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities. The Board determined that the Applicant’s statement did not mitigate the misconduct which resulted in his discharge and characterization of his service.

In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of Government affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence ( to include evidence submitted by the Applicant ) to rebut the presumption . After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s s ummary of s ervice, m edical and s ervice r ecord e ntries, d ischarge p rocess and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found that


Summary of Service

Prior Service:
 Inactive: US N R (DEP)      19900906 - 19900917              Active:         
Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Enlistment: 19900918      Years Contracted :                 Date of Discharge: 19930915
Length of Service : 02 Yrs 11 Mths 28 D ys                            Lost Time : Days UA: 14
Education Level:         Age at Enlistment:       AFQT: 82          Highest Rank /Rate : AMSAN
Evaluation marks (# of occasions):       Performance: 3.5                   Behavior: 3.5              OTA: 3.60 (3)
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): NDSM, BATTLE “E” AWARD, SASM


Medical/Service Record Entries Related to Characterization of Service or Basis for Discharge

 19930706 :        NJP - Viol UCMJ Art. 112a (w rongful use of a controlled substance ) ; V iol UCMJ Art. 86 (u nauthorized absence , 4 specifications ) ; Viol UCMJ Art. 91 (disrespect): V iol UCMJ Art. 128 (a ssault ) .
         Awarded - FOP ( $ 456.00 for 2 months); RIR ( E-2 ); Restr ( 60 days).
19930720:        D rug A lcohol A buse R eport : Amphetamine abuse , not dependent, recommendation for separation not via VA hospital.
19930728:        Applicant to unauthorized absence at 1800 on 19930728.

 19930810:        Applicant from unauthorized absence at 2030 on 19930810 (14 days/ surrendered ).
19930915:        Applicant declined to participate in a drug/alcohol rehabilitation program.

Discharge Process

 Date Notified:                                       19930715
Reason for Discharge:     -
        
Least Favorable Characterization:       

Date Applicant Responded to Notification:                  19930720
Rights Elected at Notification:
         Consult with Counsel                      
         Obtain Copies of Documents               
         Submit Statement(s) (date)                        
         Administrative Board                       
        
Commanding Officer Recommendation (date):        ( 19930818 )
Separation Authority (date):     BUPERS WASHINGTON DC ( 19930831 )
 Reason for discharge directed:  -
Characterization directed:     
Date Applicant Discharged:       19930915


Types of Documents Submitted by Applicant and Considered By Board

 Related to Military Service:      Service and/or Medical Record:            Other Records:

Related to Post-Service Period:         
         Employment:                        Finances:                          Education:               
         Health/Medical Records:                   Substance Abuse:                           Criminal Records:       
         Family/Personal Status:                   Community Service:                References:              
        
Additional Statements From Applicant:    From Representative:
Other Documentation (Describe)      


Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A. Navy Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 5/93, effective 05 Mar 93 until 21 Jul 94, Article 3630620, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED MEMBERS BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT DUE TO 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 .

C. The Manual for Courts-Martial authorizes the award of a punitive discharge if adjudged as part of the sentence upon conviction by a special or general court-martial for violation of the UCMJ, Article s 91, 92, 112a and 128 .

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 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 : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provi ded 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 grante d 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.
Employmen t / 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

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700836

    Original file (ND0700836.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change: Applicant’s Issues:1.Reenlist in California Army National Guard2.Inequitable because based on one incident in 32 months of service. 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 Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214 The NDRB did note an...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700214

    Original file (ND0700214.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s service was marred by four nonjudicial punishments and two retention warning for violations of UCMJ Articles 86 (unauthorized absence, 6 specifications), 87 (missing movement), 90 (willfully disobeying a superior commissioned officer), 91 (insubordinate conduct, 2 specifications), 92 (failure to obey, 3 specifications), 107 (false official statements), 111 (drunk operation of a motor vehicle), 112 (drunk on watch), and 134 (disorderly conduct and communicating a threat). ...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700447

    Original file (ND0700447.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board determined that the documentation provided by the Applicant did not mitigate the misconduct which resulted in the Applicant’s discharge and characterization of service. 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 Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214 The NDRB did note administrative errors on the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700449

    Original file (ND0700449.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Violations of Articles 92 and 128 constitute the “commission of a serious offense”, which forms the basis for discharge in this case. The Applicant was properly processed for separation by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense. The Naval Military Personnel Manual, Article 3630600 (for the period in question) directs that Block 28 contain the phrase “Misconduct – commission of a serious offense” when separating under these conditions.Since no other Narrative Reason...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901479

    Original file (ND0901479.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Based on the offenses committed by the Applicant, his command administratively processed him for separation. Accordingly, I recommend that the recommendation of the board be upheld.” After reviewing the record of evidence, the NDRB determined the awarded characterization of 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700763

    Original file (ND0700763.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Each violation of UCMJ Article 91 and 92constitutes the “commission of a serious offense” which forms the basis for the Applicant’s discharge and is punishable by a dishonorable discharge and up to three years of imprisonment for each specification. Discharge Process Date Notified: 20060206Reason for Discharge:-Least Favorable Characterization: Date Applicant Responded to Notification:20060206 Rights Elected at Notification: Consult with Counsel Obtain Copies of Documents Submit...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700645

    Original file (ND0700645.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 Service Prior Service: Inactive: USNR (DEP) 20010130 - 20010313 Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20010314Years Contracted:Date of Discharge: 20011218Length of Service: 00 Yrs 09Mths05 Dys Lost Time: Education Level: GED Age at Enlistment: AFQT:...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700808

    Original file (ND0700808.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s conduct during the current period of service, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service was marred by the award of one retention warning and four nonjudicial punishments (NJP) for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), Article 86 (Unauthorized absence), Article 92 (Dereliction in the performance of duties), and Article 92 (Failure to obey other lawful order). After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700407

    Original file (ND0700407.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Thisnonjudicial punishment forms the basis for the Applicant’s administrative discharge based upon misconduct due to drug use. ” 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. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700664

    Original file (ND0700664.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The record documents, the Applicant’s in-service use of illegal drugs which is the basis for the discharge. 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 Service Prior Service: Inactive: USNR (DEP)19991211 - 19991222Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 19991223Years Contracted:;...