Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700867

Original file (ND0700867.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-QMSN, USN
ND07-00867

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20070608 Characterization Received:

Narrative Reason: MISCONDUCT Authority: MILPERSMAN 1910-146

Applicant’s Request:      Characterization change to:
                           Narrative Reason change to:
Applicant’s Issues:       1. Enhance employment
                           2. Re-enlist in reserves
                           3. Not warranted by overall service record
                           4. Other member received lesser consequences for same action
                           5. Post-service conduct

Decision

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

Date: 20 071220             Location: Washington D.C         R epresentation :

Discussion

Issue(s) 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 is directed to the Addendum regarding .

Issue 3 ( ). An honorable characterization of service is warranted when the quality of a member’s service generally meets the standard of acceptable conduct and performance for naval personnel, or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization of service would be clearly inappropriate. A discharge under other than honorable conditions is warranted when a member engages in conduct involving one or more acts or omissions that constitute a significant departure from the conduct expected of members of the naval service. The Applicant’s service was marred by a nonjudicial punishment for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Article 112a. Violation of Article 112a is considered a serious offense for which a punitive discharge is authorized upon conviction at special or general court-martial. 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. Although discharge for one violation of the UCMJ may seem harsh, that violation was for abuse of a controlled substance. Individuals are indoctrinated from the day of recruitment and have had the policy reinforced through annual Navy-wide training sessions, throughout their enlistment on the U.S Navy’s zero tolerance policy for substance abuse and that a violation of this policy will result in mandatory processing for administrative separation which usually results in an unfavorable characterization of discharge. This policy is well known throughout both the Department of Defense and the civilian sector as well. Accordingly, this misconduct substantiates the reason for his separation as well as his characterization of service under other than honorable conditions. No other narrative reason for separation or characterization could more clearly describe why the Applicant was discharged.

Issue 4 ( ). The Applicant claims that his discharge was inequitable because another servicemember was punished less harshly for similar misconduct. The Board reviews the propriety and equity of a discharge individually, on a case-by-case basis. If such a review reveals an impropriety or inequity, relief is in order. Regulations permit relief on equitable grounds if the Applicant’s discharge is inconsistent with standards of discipline of the Naval service. Based upon available records, nothing indicates that the Applicant’s discharge was in any way inconsistent with the standards of discipline in the United States Navy. Mandatory processing for separation is required for Sailors who abuse illegal drugs. Separation under these conditions usually results in characterization of service as under other than honorable conditions. A preponderance of the evidence reviewed supports the conclusion that the Applicant used illegal drugs , that separation from the Naval service was appropriate, and that an other than honorable discharge was warranted.

Issue 5 ( ). Normally, to permit relief, a procedural impropriety or inequity must have occurred during the discharge process for the period of enlistment in question. The Board discovered no impropriety or inequity after a review of Applicant’s case. 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 could 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. As of this time, the Applicant has not provided any post-service documentation to consider mitigating 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: US N R (DEP)      19971023 - 19971102              Active:
Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment: 19971103                        Years Contracted :                          Date of Discharge: 20010404
Length of Service : 03 Yrs 05 Mths 02 D ys                   Lost Time : Days UA: Days Confine d :
Education Level:                  Age at Enlistment:                AFQT: 48          Highest Rank /Rate : QMSN
Evaluation marks (# of occasions):       NOT FOUND IN RECORD      Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): NONE

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

20010308:        NAVDRUGLAB, Jacksonville, FL, reported Applicant’s urine sample, tested positive for THC .

20010314 :        NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art. 112a - Wrongful use of controlled substance.
         Awarded - FOP ( 1/2 month’s pay ) for ( 3 months ); RIR ( E-3 ); Restr for ( 45 days); Extra duties ( 45 days) .

Discharge Process

Date Notified:                                       20010314
Reason for Discharge:     -
Least Favorable Characterization:

Date Applicant Responded to Notification:                  20010316
Rights Elected at Notification:
         Consult with Counsel
         Obtain Copies of Documents
         Submit Statement(s) (date)                         (however, undated statement submitted to Separation Authority
         Administrative Board

Commanding Officer Recommendation (date):        ( 20010319 )
Separation Authority (date):     COMNAVPERSCOM MILLLINGTON TN ( 20010330 )
Reason for discharge directed: -
Characterization directed:
Date Applicant Discharged:       20010404

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 February 2001 until
15 July 2001, 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, possession, etc., of controlled substances.

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

USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700681

Original file (MD0700681.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) 19990218 - 19990314 Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 19990315Years Contracted:4; Extension: Date of Discharge:20010502Length of Service: 02 Yrs 01Mths18 DysLost Time:Days UA: Days Confined: Education Level:...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800994

Original file (ND0800994.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 conduct mitigates the reason for the characterization of discharge.The Applicant provided a personal statement and as evidence of post-service accomplishments. The Board determined an upgrade or change would be inappropriate.After a thorough review of the available evidence,...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800704

Original file (ND0800704.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Types of Documents SubmittedRelated to Military Service: DD 214: Service and/or 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: After a review of the Applicants records it was discovered the Applicant received an administrative discharge board and the board members determined the...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801528

Original file (ND0801528.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Board has determined an upgrade is not warranted at this time based on the seriousness of the offense committed and the evidence of post service employment was not sufficient to mitigate the misconduct which resulted in her discharge. ” 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...
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 | 2006_Navy | ND0600553

Original file (ND0600553.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Mandatory processing for separation is required for Sailors who abuse illegal drugs. 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
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901776

Original file (ND0901776.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.Applicant’s misconduct was an isolated incident.2. ” 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. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of...
NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001574

Original file (ND1001574.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs determines eligibility for such post-service benefits, not the Naval Discharge Review 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 within 15 years of the Applicant’s date of discharge. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities.
NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001031

Original file (ND1001031.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. ” 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-01156

Original file (ND02-01156.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) also advised that the board first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing. As the representative, we ask that consideration be given to equitable relief, as this is a matter that involves a determination whether a discharge should be changed under the equity standards, to any issue upon which the applicant submits to the Board's discretionary authority, under SECNAVINST 5420.174C. At this time, the Applicant has not...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700867

Similar Decisions