Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700703
Original file (ND0700703.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
ex-SKSR, USN
ND07-00703
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20070503   Characterization Received:
Narrative Reason: MISCONDUCT Authority: MILPERSMAN 1910-146

Applicant’s Request:     Characterization change to:
                           Narrative Reason change to:
Applicant’s Issues:      1. Reenlistment Opportunities
                           2. Applicant has matured since separating from the Navy

Decision

 By a vote of the Characterization shall .
By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall MISCONDUCT .

Date: 20071205 Location: Washington D.C          R epresentation : NONE

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 Applicant contends that he has matured since separating from the Navy. T here 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 one statement speaking to his character and local police record check as post-service accomplishments . The Applicant's efforts need to be more encompassing. For example, the Applicant could have produced evidence of a verifiable and continuous employment record, documentation of community service, and educational pursuits and evidence of a drug free lifestyle . The Board determined that the documentation provided by the Applicant did not mitigate the misconduct 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: USNR (DEP)     20030322 - 20030414              Active:
Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Enlistment: 20030415      Years Contracted :                 Date of Discharge: 20040302
Length of Service: 00 Yrs 10 Mths 18 D ys         Lost Time: Days UA: Days Confined:
Education Level:         Age at Enlistment:       AFQT: 38          Highest Rank/Rate: SKSA
Evaluation marks (# of occasions):       Performance: N/A          Behavior: N/A     OTA: N/A
Awards and Decorations (per DD 214): NDSM


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

 20040112 :         NAVDRUGLAB, San Diego, CA, reported Applicant’s urine sample, received 20040105, tested positive for cocaine and MDMA.

20040130:        NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art.112a - Use of controlled substance.
         Awarded - FOP ($694.00) for (2 months); RIR (E-1); Restr for (45 days); Extra duties (45 days).
Discharge Process

 Date Notified:                                       20040202
Reason for Discharge:    -
Least Favorable Characterization:       

Date Applicant Responded to Notification:                 20040202
Rights Elected at Notification:
         Consult with Counsel                      
         Obtain Copies of Documents               
         Submit Statement(s) (date)                        
         Administrative Board                      
         GCMCA review                               

Commanding Officer Recommendation (date):        ( 20040213 )
Separation Authority (date):     COMMANDER, CARRIER GROUP FIVE ( 20040221 )
Reason for discharge directed:  -
Characterization directed:     
Date Applicant Discharged:       20040302

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), re-issued October 2002, effective 22 Aug ust 2002 until
28 April 2005, Article 1910-146, 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 (Wrongful use of 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, 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 | 2007_Marine | MD0700998

    Original file (MD0700998.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 ServicePrior Service: Inactive: USMCR (DEP)1990925 - 20000705Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20000706Years Contracted:; Extension: Date of Discharge:20040202Length of Service: 03 Yrs 06Mths27 DysLost Time:Days UA: Days Confined: Education...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1500500

    Original file (ND1500500.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Based on the Article 112a violation, processing for administrative separation is mandatory. 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 remain UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS and the narrative reason for separation shall remain MISCONDUCT (DRUG ABUSE). ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700470

    Original file (ND0700470.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s service was one occasion of nonjudicial punishment for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Article 107[False Official Statement (2 specifications)]. ” 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. If a former member has been discharged for more than 15 years, has already been granted a personal...

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801298

    Original file (MD0801298.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s case was considered under the pertinent standards of equity to determine if any factors in this particular case merited clemency.However, the Applicant submitted no verifiable documents as mentioned in the above paragraph for the Board to consider in a clemency review. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Service Record Entries, Court-Martial proceedings, Discharge Process, Post Service Conduct and Accomplishments,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800630

    Original file (ND0800630.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Decision Date: 20080416Location: Washington D.C Representation: By a vote of the Characterization shall .By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall MISCONDUCT (CIVIL CONVICTION).Discussion : 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. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700311

    Original file (ND0700311.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board determined that the documentation provided by the Applicant did not mitigate the misconduct 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. Recommendation on Separation: BY Recommendation on Characterization: BY Commanding Officer Recommendation...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801758

    Original file (ND0801758.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requested his discharge characterization be upgraded to an “Honorable”. The NDRB determined the awarded discharge characterization was appropriate for the offenses committed; an upgrade would be inappropriate.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant Complaint Procedures : If you believe that...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700733

    Original file (ND0700733.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 3 (): 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. After a...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201033

    Original file (ND1201033.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ” 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. 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. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700101

    Original file (MD0700101.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s misconduct included unauthorized absence and wrongful use, possession, etc … of a controlled substance. 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 the Applicant’s discharge proper and equitable. The Manual for Courts-Martial authorizes the award of a punitive discharge if adjudged as part of the sentence upon...