Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800596

Original file (ND0800596.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-AA, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20080304

Characterization of Service Received:

Narrative Reason for Discharge:
Authority for Discharge: MILPERSMAN

Applicant’s Request:     Characterization change to:
                           Narrative Reason change to:

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive: US N R (DEP)      19980928 - 19981008 ELS                   Active:
Inactive: USNR (DEP)     20000122 - 20000130
Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment: 20000131      Period of enlistment : Years Extension          Date of Discharge: 20020607
Length of Service : Yrs Mths 07 D ys      Education Level:         Age at Enlistment:       AFQT: 59
Highest Rank /Rate : AN     Evaluation marks: Performance: NA         Behavior: NA      OTA: NA
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJPs :
         20020415 : Art(s) 112A . Awarded - , , , Susp -

Types of Documents Submitted

Related 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:             From Representat ion :              From Member of Congress:
Other Documentation (Describe)

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB)
DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT

Applicant’s Issues

1. Reenlist
2. Immature
3. Post Service

Decision

Date: 20 08 0 416 Location: Washington D.C R epresentation :

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall MISCONDUCT-DRUG ABUSE .

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. The Applicant is directed to the Addendum regarding .

Issue 2: (Equity) The Applicant contends that her characterization of service is inequitable based upon her immaturity during her time of service. The record shows that the Applicant was 23 years old when she enlisted. This is significantly more mature than the average recruit, most of whom live up to their commitment of service to their country. Furthermore, the Applicant’s enlistment documents show th at she tested positive for use of illegal drugs while assigned to the delayed entry program (DEP ). In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of government affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption. The Applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support h er issue. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the Applicant produced any evidence, to support the contention of immaturity; and even if she had, it would not mitigate or excuse her misconduct. T he separation code (entered on block 26 of the DD-214) indicates that the Applicant waived h er right to an administrative board. S eparation processing is mandatory for Sailors who abuse illegal drugs. Violation of UCMJ Article 112a (wrongful use of a controlled substance) carr ies a maximum penalty of a Dishonorable Discharge and up to 5 years of imprisonment if adjudicated by a court martial. Regulations limit the Board’s review to a determination of the propriety and equity of the discharge. The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the characterization of service, reflects her willful failure to meet the requirements of her contract with the U.S. Navy and falls far short of that required for an upgrade.

Issue 3: (Equity) 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 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 a personal statement and several character references. The Applicant's efforts need to be more encompassing than those provided. For example, the Applicant could have produced evidence of continuing educational pursuits, a verifiable employment record, documentation of community service, evidence of drug free existence, and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities. The Board determined that the documentation provided by the Applicant did not mitigate the misconduct which resulted in his characterization of service.

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

Pertinent Regulation/Law

A . The Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 33, effective 16 Jul 2001 until 21 Aug 2002, 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 | 2009_Navy | ND0900637

Original file (ND0900637.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant contends she is entitled to a discharge upgrade in her characterization to “Honorable”, due to her post service conduct. 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 the discharge was proper and equitable at the time of discharge;however, based upon the fact a single error in judgment was made, the Board finds this to be mitigated by...
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 | 2009_Navy | ND0900702

Original file (ND0900702.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.The Applicant provided five post-service character references, but no other documentation to support her post-service conduct. The Board...
NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1002272

Original file (ND1002272.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: Rehabilitation/Treatment: Criminal Records: Personal Documentation: Community Service: References: Department of VA letter: Other Documentation: Additional Statements:From Applicant: From/To Representation:From/ToCongress member: DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900627

Original file (ND0900627.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Violation of Article 112a (Drug use) is one such offense requiring mandatory separation regardless of time in service, grade or record of 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. Whenever a member is being processed through the Physical Evaluation Board, and subsequently is processed for an administrative...
USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0701257

Original file (MD0701257.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request: Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USMCR (DEP)19921204 - 19921208 Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 19921209Period of enlistment: Years MonthsDate of Discharge: 19940520Length of Service: 01 Yrs 05 Mths12 DysEducation Level: Age at Enlistment:20AFQT: 86MOS: 0200Highest Rank: LCPLProficiency/Conduct marks (# of occasions): 4.5(3) / 4.5(3)Awards and Decorations (per DD 214): NDSM, Rifle...
NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1002052

Original file (ND1002052.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Relief denied.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 and the narrative reason for separation shall remain .The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing for a period of fifteen years from the date of discharge. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800858

Original file (ND0800858.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USNR (DEP)19981110 - 19981129Active: USMC 19970325-19970404 ELS Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 19981130Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20010622Length of Service: Years Months23 DaysEducation Level: Age at Enlistment:AFQT: 53Highest Rank/Rate:PR3EvaluationMarks:Performance: 3.3(3) Behavior:2.3(3)OTA: 2.92Awards and Decorations (per...
USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0800342

Original file (MD0800342.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

(Illegal Drug Use) Sentence - ,SPCMs: CC:6105 Counseling: 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: From Representation: From Member of Congress: Other Documentation (Describe) DEPARTMENT OF THE...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801441

Original file (ND0801441.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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 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...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800596

Similar Decisions