Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700647
Original file (ND0700647.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
ex-MM2, USN
ND07-00647
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20070418   Characterization Received: OTHER THAN HONORABLE
Narrative Reason: MISCONDUCT Authority: MILPERSMAN 1910-146

 Applicant’s Request:      Characterization change to:
                           Narrative Reason change to:
Applicant’s Issues:       1. One time use and failure in judgment
                           2. Discharge a result of stress from deployments and Gulf War services
                           3. Post Service

Decision

 By a vote of the Characterization shall .
 By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall MISCONDUCT .
Date: 20 071129 Location: Washington D.C          R epresentation :

Discussion

 Issue 1: ( ). The Applicant contends that his misconduct was based on a one time use and a failure in judgment . The Applicant’s record reflects that he used cocaine twice during the current enlistment contract and that he completed rehabilitation treatment for cocaine dependence.

Issue 2: ( ). The Applicant implies that his discharge was a result of stress from deployments and Gulf War services. The government enjoys a presumption of regularity in the conduct of its affairs. The Applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support his issue. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the Applicant produced any evidence, to support the contention that stress was the basis for his misconduct. The Applicant’s statements alone do not overcome the government’s presumption of regularity in this case.

Issue 3 : ( ). T here is no law or regulation, which provides that an unfavorable discharge, may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time . 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 no documentation of post-service accomplishments. T he Applicant could have produced documentation of community service, evidence of continuing educational pursuits and drug free existence , a verifiable employment record, and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities. Absent any documentation provided by the Applicant for the Board to consider, the Board determined that the Applicant’s service record did not mitigat e the misconduct that resulted in the characterization of discharge. An upgrade would be inappropriate.

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: US N R (DEP)      19820316 - 19830301              Active:          19830302 - 19870227
                                                                                          19870228 - 19871129
                                                                                          19871130 - 19871214 COG
                                                                                          19871215 - 19891212
                                                                                          19891213 - 19930815
                                                                                          19930816 - 19970522

Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Enlistment: 19970523      Years Contracted : ; Extension:   Date of Discharge: 20010618
Length of Service : 4 Yrs 0 Mths 26 D ys    Lost Time : Days UA: Days Confine d :
Education Level:         Age at Enlistment:       AFQT:        Highest Rank /Rate : MM2      
Evaluation marks (# of occasions):                OTA: 2.85 (5)
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): NAVY ACHIEVEMENT MEDAL, GOOD CONDUCT MEDAL (4 TH ), NAVY “E” RIBBON (2 ND ), MERITORIOUS UNIT COMMENDATION (2 ND ), NATIONAL DEFENSE SERVICE MEDAL, ARMED FORCES EXPEDITIONARY MEDAL, SEA SERVICE DEPLOYMENT RIBBON (4 TH ), SOUTHWEST ASIA SERVICE MEDAL, HUMANITARIAN SERVICE MEDAL

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

 20000912 :         NAVDRUGLAB, San Diego, CA, reported Applicant’s urine sample, received 20000906 , tested positive for ( Cocaine ).

 20000913 :        NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art. 112a – Wrongful use of controlled substance-Cocaine .
         Awarded - FOP ( $ 968.1 ) for ( 2 months); RIR ( E-4 ); Restr for ( 45 days); Extra duties ( 45 days) .
                   FOP and RIR suspended for 6 months
20001106 :         NAVDRUGLAB, San Diego, CA , reported Applicant’s urine sample, received 20001103, tested positive for (Cocaine).
20001115:        NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art. 112a – Wrongful use of controlled substance-Cocaine.
         Awarded - Restr for ( 18 days); Extra duties ( 18 days).
20001120 :        Medical Record: Reason for visit: Treatment recommendation based on substance use screening
         Diagnosis: Meets cocaine dependence
         Recommendation: Receive treatment in partial-hospitalization Treatment Program

20011229:        Applicant completes SARD.






Discharge Process

 Date Notified:                                       20001128
Reason for Discharge:     -
         -
        
Least Favorable Characterization:       

Date Applicant Responded to Notification:                  20001030
Rights Elected at Notification:
         Consult with Counsel                      
         Obtain Copies of Documents               
         Submit Statement(s) (date)                        
         Administrative Board                       
         GCMCA review                               

Administrative Board Date :       20010316
Findings, by preponderance of the evidence:     BY - .
                   BY SEPARATION WARRANTED.
 Recommendation on Separation:   BY
Recommendation on Characterization:     BY

Commanding Officer Recommendation (date):        ( 20010604 )
Separation Authority (date):     COMMANDER AMPHIBGRUTHREE ( 20010608 )
 Reason for discharge directed:  -
Characterization directed:     
Date Applicant Discharged:       20010618


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 . The Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 31, dated 20 Feb 01, effective 12 Feb 2001 until 15 Jul 2001, Article 1910-146 (formerly 3630620), Separation by Reason of Misconduct - 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.

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 | 2010_Navy | ND1000514

    Original file (ND1000514.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB determined an upgrade would be inappropriate.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entriesand discharge process, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reason for separation shall remain (DRUG ABUSE). ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700837

    Original file (ND0700837.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Issue 2 ().The Applicant claims that the negative result returned from the urinalysis he underwent upon termination of his unauthorized absence (UA) demonstrates that he did not use illegal drugs. Further, the Board determined that even if credible, the Applicant’s claim to not having used illegal drugs did not mitigate the Applicant’s lengthy UA period, which constituted a serious offense for which a punitive discharge is authorized upon conviction at special or general court-martial, and...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000659

    Original file (ND1000659.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. When notified of administrative separation processing using the procedure, the Applicant rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request an administrative board. ” 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700848

    Original file (ND0700848.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    With the admission of use and possession by the Applicant, Captain’s Mast and Urinalysis is not a pre-requisite for administrative separation due to drug abuse.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. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700500

    Original file (ND0700500.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant was found not physically qualified by the Department of the Navy Bureau of Medicine and Surgery and subsequently properly processed for separation in accordance with MILPERSMAN 1910-120; the separation authority directed that that Applicant be discharged under Honorable conditions. There is no indication in the evidence of record or in the documentation submitted by the Applicant that the Applicant was recommended for or processed for a medical board. After a thorough review...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0902491

    Original file (ND0902491.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: Substance Abuse: Criminal Records: Family/Personal Status: Community Service: References: Additional Statements: From Applicant: From/To Representation:From/ToCongress member:Other Documentation: Pertinent Regulation/Law A. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600987

    Original file (ND0600987.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Elements of Discharge: [INVOLUNTARY] Discharge Process: Date Notified: 20020504 Reason for Discharge due to: Least Favorable Characterization: Record Supports Narrative Reason: Date Applicant Responded to Notification: 20020528Rights Elected at Notification:Consult with Counsel Administrative Board Obtain Copies Submit Statement(s) (date) Recommendation of Commanding Officer (date): (20020605)Separation Authority (date): COMMANDER, SUBMARINE GROUP 10 (20020613)Reason for discharge...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0601119

    Original file (ND0601119.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Elements of Discharge: [INVOLUNTARY] Discharge Process: Date Notified:20010606Reason for Discharge due to: PHYSICAL OR MENTAL CONDITIONSLeast Favorable Characterization: Date Applicant Responded to Notification: 20010606Rights Elected at Notification:Consult with Counsel Administrative Board Obtain Copies Submit Statement(s) (date)GCMCA Review Recommendation of Commanding Officer (date): (20010606)Separation Authority (date):COMMANDING OFFICER, NAVAL HOSPITAL CORPS SCHOOL (20010606)Narrative...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201247

    Original file (ND1201247.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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801854

    Original file (ND0801854.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB determined the Applicant was properly discharged for failure to meet physical standards but the characterization of service awarded was not appropriate given the Applicant’s nearly six years of honorable service. ” 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. Additionally, the NDRB does not have the authority to change...