Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700738
Original file (ND0700738.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
ex-HT3, USN
ND07-00738
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20070510   Characterization Received:
Narrative Reason: MISCONDUCT     Authority: MILPERSMAN 1910 - 146

 Applicant’s Request:      Characterization change to:
                           Narrative Reason change to:
Applicant’s Issues:       1. RE – Code change
 2. In service - Equity
                           3. Applicant claims his urinalysis test came back negative for steroids and there was no
                           e vidence found to show that he was intending to dis tribute.

Decision

 By a vote of the Characterization shall .
 By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall MISCONDUCT .
Date: 20 071213             Location: Washington D.C         R epresentation :

Discussion

 Issue(s) 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 ( ) : 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. An under other than honorable conditions 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 one nonjudicial punishment proceeding for violations of Articles 92 (violation of general law or regulation), 112a (wrongful use, possession etc … of a controlled substance), 128 (assault consummated by battery) and 134 (communicating a threat) 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 3 ( ) : The Applicant contends that he never used drugs and there was no evidence found to show that he was intending to distribute a controlled substance. The evidence of record did not show that the Applicant was either not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions. The NDRB recognizes that serving in the U.S. Navy is challenging. Our country is fortunate to have men and women willing to ensure the hardships and sacrifices required in order to serve their country. Your documented possession of a controlled substance with the intent to distribute is clearly considered as “ wrongful use of a controlled substance ” punishable under the UCMJ, Article 112a. The ND R B found that the Applicant ’ s service was equitably characterized.

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)      NONE               Active: 19990519 - 20021121
Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Enlistment: 20021122      Years Contracted : ; Extension:   Date of Discharge: 20030306
Length of Service : 03 Yrs 09 Mths 18 D ys          Lost Time : Days UA: Days Confine d :
Education Level:         Age at Enlistment:       AFQT: 47          Highest Rank /Rate : HT2
Evaluation marks (# of occasions):       Performance: 3.2 ( 5 ) Behavior: 3.8 ( 5 )     OTA: 3.3
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): NATIONAL DEFENSE SAERVICE MEDAL, MERITORIOUS UNIT COMMENDATION, ENLISTED SURFACE WARFARE SPECIALIST, NAVY AND MARINE CORPS ACHIEVEMENT MEDAL

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

 20030212 :        NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art. 92, (2 specs) violation of general lawful order or regulation, 112a wrongful use and introduce a controlled substance, 128, assault consummated by a battery, and 134, communicating a threat. Awarded - FOP ( $833.00 ) for ( 2 months); RIR ( E-3 ); Restr for ( 45 days); Extra duties ( 45 days) .
Discharge Process

 Date Notified:                                       20030213
Reason for Discharge:     -
         -
        
Least Favorable Characterization:       

Date Applicant Responded to Notification:                  20020213
Rights Elected at Notification:
         Consult with Counsel                      
         Obtain Copies of Documents               
         Submit Statement(s) (date)                        
         Administrative Board                       
         GCMCA review                               

Commanding Officer Recommendation (date):        ( 20030214 )
Separation Authority (date):     COMMANDER SUBMARINE FORCE, U.S. PACIFIC FLEET ( 20030220 )
 Reason for discharge directed:  -
Characterization directed:     
Date Applicant Discharged:       20030306



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 2002 until Present, 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 92, 112a, 128 and 134 .


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 | 2008_Navy | ND0801439

    Original file (ND0801439.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB advises the Applicant that despite a service member’s prior record of service, certain serious offenses, even though isolated, warrant separation from the Navy in order to maintain proper order and discipline.However, in the Applicant case, the evidence reflects he committed numerous offenses during this enlistment, thus contradicting his allegation the discharge is based on one isolated incident.The Applicant's misconduct is documented in his service record, which is marred by...

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801541

    Original file (MD0801541.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant should be aware completion of these items alone does not guarantee an upgrade from an unfavorable discharge as each discharge is reviewed by the Board on a case-by-case basis to determine if post-service conduct mitigates the reason for the characterization of discharge.Besides the personal statement provided on the DD Form-293, the Applicant failed to provide any additional statements and evidence of post The Board determined based on the limited documentation provided an...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900735

    Original file (ND0900735.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Violation of Article 112a is one such offense requiring mandatory separation regardless of time in service or grade. The Board determined the characterization of service received, “Under Other Than Honorable”, was an appropriate characterization considering the length of service, UCMJ violations involved, and lack of post service documentation.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900025

    Original file (ND0900025.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant has requested an upgrade in his discharge characterization to “General (Under Honorable Conditions)” to better his life. The Board determined the characterization of service received, “Under Other Than Honorable Conditions”, was an appropriate characterization considering the time served and the numerous and varied UCMJ violations involved, and based on the lack post service documentation provided an upgrade would be inappropriate.Should the Applicant obtain additional...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1300725

    Original file (ND1300725.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends there was no evidence for either of his misconduct incidents. The Applicant has not presented any documentation to prove his commanding officer disregarded relevant information or failed to comply with applicable regulations during the NJP proceedings.After a complete review of the records and the Applicant’s detailed statement, the NDRB determined he was...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900893

    Original file (ND0900893.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On page 4, Item 8, in the instructions for completion of DD Form 293, the Applicant is notified to submit evidence “which substantiate or relate directly to your issues in Item 6.” (Issues: Why an upgrade or change is requested and justification for the request). ” 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900309

    Original file (ND0900309.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant is advised that completion of these items alone does not guarantee the upgrade of an unfavorable discharge, as each discharge is reviewed by the Board on a case by case basis to determine if post-service accomplishments help demonstrate previous in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member’s overall character.Besides the Applicant DD Form 293 and personal letter, no documentation was provided for review. Should the Applicant obtain additional...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700942

    Original file (ND0700942.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Date: 20080103Location:Washington D.C Representation: Discussion Issues 1 -2: 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’s service was marred by one discharge warning and two non-judicial punishments for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) Article 92 (Failure to obey a direct order), Article 107 (False Official Statement), Article...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801237

    Original file (ND0801237.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A “General (Under Honorable Conditions)” is appropriate if the member’s service has been honest and faithful but significant negative aspects of the member’s conduct or performance outweighs positive aspects of the member’s military record.Due to the significant negative aspects in the Applicants record of service, the Board determined thatthe medical evaluations were sufficient enough to only support an upgrade in the discharge characterization to “ General (Under Honorable...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900958

    Original file (ND0900958.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. By a unanimous vote of 5-0, the Board determined the characterization of service received, “Under Other Than Honorable Conditions,” and the narrative reason for the discharge, “Pattern of Misconduct,” shall remain as issued based on his length of service and the UCMJ violations involved. You may view DoD Instruction 1332.28 and other Decisional Documents by going online...