Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801316
Original file (ND0801316.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-AA, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20080602
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) 20010515 - 20010719                 Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment: 20010720     Period of E nlistment : Years Extension        Date of Discharge: 20041208
Length of Service : Y ear s M onth s 19 D a ys       Education Level:        Age at Enlistment:      AFQT: 35
Highest Rank /Rate : AN     Evaluation M arks: Performance:   4.0 ( 3 )          Behavior: 3.0 ( 3 )        OTA: 3.77
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): SSDR (2) AFEM NER MUC NDSM GWOTEM GCM

NJP :
20041112 : Art icle 112A ( Drug use, w rongful use of cocaine)
Awarded : Susp ended :

S CM : SPCM : C C : Retention Warnings:

Types of Documents Submitted/reviewed

 Related 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 Representat ion :    From Congress m ember :

Other Documentation (Describe) :

Pertinent Regulation/Law

 A . The Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), re-issued October 2002, effective 22 August 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.




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

Applicant’s Issues

 1. Desires education benefits.
2. Isolated incident.
3 . Post service conduct .

Decision

Date : 20 08 1016            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 , specifically the paragraph concerning , regarding .

: ( ) . The Applicant states this was an isol ated incident of poor judgment and since h e was an outstanding sailor, his record of service mitigates his misconduct. 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. The Applicant’s record of service was marred by one non-judicial punishment for violation of the U niform C ode of M ilitary J ustice (UCMJ): Article 112a (Drug use, wrongful use of cocaine ) . This specific violation is punishable by a dishonorable discharge and up to 5 years of imprisonment if adjudicated and awarded as part of a sentence by a special or general court-martial. The command did not pursue a punitive discharge but opted instead for an administrative discharge.

The Board reviews the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s 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. The Applicant states his discharge was based on one isolated incident . For the edification of the Applicant, d espite a service member’s prior record of se rvice certain serious offenses, even though isolate d, warrant separation from the n aval service in order to maintain proper order and discipline. The Applicant had served over three years on active duty when he used cocaine. He knew the risks he was taking and the possible results (immediate discharge) if he were caught : He willingly accepted that risk. Illegal drug use cannot be tolerated by any member of the US Navy regardless of grade or time in service. The evidence of record does not demonstrate that the Applicant was not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions. The Applicant was discharged in accordance with Naval policy on drug abuse.

The Applicant has requested an upgrade in his characterization of service to “Honorable”. W hen the quality of a Sailor’s service has met the standards of accepted conduct and performance of duty for military personnel , it is appropriate to characterize that service under “H onorable ” conditions. An “U nder Other T han Honorable Conditions ” characterization is appropriate when the basis for separation is commission or omission of an act that constitutes a significant departure from the conduct expected of a service m ember. The Board acknowledged the Applicant’s conduct was a significant departure from the conduct expected of a Sailor in the U.S. Navy and the awarded discharge was appropriate. The Board determined an upgrade to “H onorable ” would be inappropriate.

: ( ) . The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. However, there is no law or regulation which provides 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 . Outstanding post-service conduct, 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 u nder review, is considered . The key word here is “Outstanding”. The Board is looking for actions that go beyond simply daily living . Documentation to help support a post service conduct upgrade includes, but is not limited to: a verifiable continuous
employment record ; documentation of community or church service ; certification of non-involvement with civil authorities ; evidence of financial stability or letters of good standing from banks, credit card company’s, or other financial institutions; documentation of a drug free lifestyle; and character witness statements. 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 no documentation for the Board to review. T o warrant an upgrade the Applicant’s post service efforts need to be more encompassing. T he Applicant could have produced evidence of a verifiable employment record; letters of reference from employers or community leaders; documentation of community/church volunteer service; evidence of a drug/alcohol free existence; existence, and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities, evidence of financial stability; marriage or birth certificate, a copy of college transcripts/diploma or training certificates, and contact information for his recruiter. Without having the necessary documentation to review, t he Board determined an upgrade or change 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 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 or is referred to a court martial 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 other medical related reasons. 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 special 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. The NDRB does not have the jurisdictional authority to review a discharge or dismissal resulting from a general court-martial.

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 | ND0900694

    Original file (ND0900694.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board determined the awarded discharge was appropriate and an upgrade based on an isolated incident would be inappropriate.The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record Entries, Discharge Process and DD Form 293 submitted by the Applicant, the Board found ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant Complaint Procedures : If you believe...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801561

    Original file (ND0801561.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ” 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 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,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0902413

    Original file (ND0902413.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities. The evidence of record does not demonstrate the Applicant was not responsible for his conduct or he should not be held accountable for his actions.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries and administrative separation process, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901361

    Original file (MD0901361.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. Regulations limit the NDRB’s review to a determination of the propriety and equity of the discharge.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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801574

    Original file (ND0801574.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.While the Board applauds the Applicant’s efforts to improve himself, it was After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record Entries, Discharge Process...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900080

    Original file (ND0900080.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.Other than the submitted DD-293 Form the Applicant failed to provide any documentation in support of his request for an upgrade. After a...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001372

    Original file (ND1001372.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant wants to use the GI Bill for education. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800995

    Original file (ND0800995.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Types of Documents Submitted/reviewedRelated 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) Pertinent Regulation/Law A. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a...

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801119

    Original file (MD0801119.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    When the service of a member of the Naval Service has been honest and faithful, it is appropriate to characterize that service as honorable. 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 Board determined an upgrade was not warranted.After a thorough...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900324

    Original file (ND0900324.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board determined the characterization of service received, “General (Under Honorable Conditions)”, was an appropriate characterization considering the length of service, UCMJ violations involved, and the lack of post service documentation.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record Entries, and Discharge Process, the Board found Pertinent Regulation/Law A. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members...