Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700538
Original file (ND0700538.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
ex-AD2, USN
ND07-00538
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20070308   Characterization Received:
Narrative Reason: MISCONDUCT Authority: MILPERSMAN 3630620

 Applicant’s Request:      Characterization change to:
                           Narrative Reason change to:
Applicant’s Issues:       1. In service –Equity (applicant claiming isolated incident in 5 ½ years of good service)
                           2. Post service – Equity

Decision

 By a vote of the Characterization shall .     
By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall MISCONDUCT .
Date: 20 0711 15 Location: Washington D.C          R epresentation :

Discussion

 Issue 1 ( ) : 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 discharge 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. T he Applicant ’ s service was marred by a urine sample which tested positive for methamphetamines which is a violation of Article 112a of the UCMJ. 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 service.

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 civilian life subsequent to leaving Naval 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 his statement of post service accomplishments. The Applicant ’ s efforts need to be more encompassing. For example, the Applicant could have produced evidence of a verifiable employment record, documentation of educational pursuits, documentation of community service, and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities. The Board found that the Applicant ’ s undocumented claims of good post service conduct did not mitigate the circumstances that resulted in the characterization of discharge.

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. 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: NONE                                       Active:
Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Enlistment: 19890905      Years Contracted :        Date of Discharge: 19950213
Length of Service : Active: 05 Yrs 04 Mths 29 D ys          Inactive: 00 Yrs 00 Mths 10 D ys
 Lost Time : Days UA: Days Confine d :
Education Level:         Age at Enlistment:       AFQT: 80          Highest Rank /Rate : AD2
Evaluation marks (# of occasions):       Performance: 3.6 ( 7 )       Behavior: 3.7 ( 7 )          OTA: 3.60
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): GCM, NDSM, SSDR, SASM

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

 19890915:        Applicant to active duty in the Active Marine Program for 36 months. Applicant extended three times for a total 29 months in extensions.

19941102 :         NAVDRUGLAB, San Diego, CA, reported Applicant’s urine sample, received 19941027 , tested positive for methamphetamine.

19941130:        Drug and Alcohol Abuse Report: Amphetamine abuse, abuse denied. Unit sweep urinalysis on 19941025. CAAC and physician recommended Level 1. Commanding Officer recommended separation via VA hospital. Comments: Command conducted a unit sweep on 19941025 in which Petty Officer S_ was identified by urine sample test as positive for methamphetamine. Petty Officer S_ was referred to admin board which was conducted on 19950106. Petty Officer S_ was recommended for a general discharge and is considered to have no potential for future naval service.

19950213:        Applicant declined Level III treatment.
Discharge Process

 Date Notified:                                       19941220
Reason for Discharge:     -
         -
Least Favorable Characterization:       

Date Applicant Responded to Notification:                  19941220
Rights Elected at Notification:
         Consult with Counsel                      
         Obtain Copies of Documents               
         Submit Statement(s) (date)                         ( 19941117 )
          Administrative Board                       
         GCMCA review                               

Administrative Board Date :       19950106
Findings, by preponderance of the evidence:     BY - .
          BY - .
          BY SEPARATION WARRANTED.
 Recommendation on Separation:   BY
Recommendation on Characterization:     BY

Commanding Officer Recommendation (date):        ( UNDATED )
Separation Authority (date):     BUPERS ( 19950213 )
 Reason for discharge directed:  -
Characterization directed:     
Date Applicant Discharged:       19950213






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 9/94, effective 22 July 1994 until 2 October 1996,
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 112a , wrongful use, possession of a controlled substance.


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 | 2006_Navy | ND0600523

    Original file (ND0600523.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND06-00523 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20060228. The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). This member is not drug dependent.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600014

    Original file (ND0600014.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). Comments: IAW OPNAVINST 5350.4A SNM has no potential for future service and should be processed for separation.900405: An Administrative Discharge Board, based upon preponderance of the evidence and by unanimous vote, found that the Applicant had committed misconduct due to commission of a serious offense and misconduct due to drug abuse,...

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-01123

    Original file (MD03-01123.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, NDRB discerned no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the Applicant’s service at the time of issue. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Copies of DD Form 214...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00677

    Original file (ND01-00677.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00677 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010420, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. Relief based on this issue is not warranted.The applicant’s issue 3 states: “We refer this case to the Board for their careful and compassionate consideration and request the applicant's discharge be reviewed for Clemency due to post service.” The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the re...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-01169

    Original file (ND02-01169.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 Applicant’s service record (59 pages) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 820623 - 830608 COG Active: USN 830609 - 970605 HON Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 970606 Date of Discharge: 010830 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 04 02...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00071

    Original file (ND99-00071.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    No indication of appeal in the record.930603: Medical officer evaluation for drug abuse found the applicant to be a drug abuser, not drug dependent and recommended separation from the service without a provision of VA rehabilitation treatment. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper and equitable (C and D).In the applicant’s issue 1, there is no law or regulation that provides...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500669

    Original file (ND0500669.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The record clearly shows that the Applicant willfully and negligently abused (used) illegal drugs, as documented by the positive results from the Naval Drug Laboratory in San Diego, CA on 20 020605 and by the subsequent nonjudicial punishment (NJP) proceedings on 20 020611 for violation of UCMJ Article 112a Wrongful use of controlled substance. As of this time, the Applicant...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00286

    Original file (ND02-00286.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, NDRB discerned no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the Applicant’s service at the time of issue. Commanding Officer's determination is to process member for separation as he shows no potential for further naval service.940517: BUPERS directed the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious...

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-00428

    Original file (MD03-00428.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The reason was that I tested positive for drug use. Not appealed.010319: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.010319: Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00559

    Original file (ND00-00559.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 Notice of appeal of captain's mast and request for discovery of the governmentLetter of deficiency to administrative separation board CO QM2 (applicant), USNAffidavit of M_ R_ H_, Ph.D Statements of character from all immediate supervisors spanning the period of time relevantE-mail correspondence between Capt. 990303: An Administrative...