Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801753
Original file (ND0801753.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-HA, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20080819
Characterization of Service Received:
Narrative Reason for Discharge: DRUG ABUSE
Authority for Discharge: MILPERSMAN

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

Summary of Service

Prior Service:

Inactive: US N R (DEP) 19951012 - 19960825        Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment: 19960826    Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20000726     Highest Rank/Rate: HN
Length of Service : Y ear s M onth s 01 D a y
Education Level:      AFQT: 53
Evaluation M arks: Performance: 4.0 ( 3 ) Behavior: 3.6 ( 3 ) OTA: 3.39

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):

Periods of UA /C ONF : SCM: SPCM: CC: Retention Warning Counseling :

NJP :
- 20000418 :       Article 112a (Drug use)
         Awarded : Susp ended :

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 :

Oth er Documentation :





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

Applicant’s Issues

1. Isolated incident in 47 months of service with no other adverse action.
2. Post service conduct.

Decision

Date: 20 08 1211            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

: ( ) . The Applicant contends his discharge was inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident in 47 months of service with no other adverse action . 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. Despite a service member’s prior record of service, certain serious offenses, even though isolated, warrant separation from the Naval service in order to maintain proper order and discipline. The Applicant’s service record is marred by an NJP on 18 April 2000 for a violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 112a (Drug use), thus substantiating the misconduct for which he was separated. The NDRB advises the Applicant certain serious offenses warrant separation from the service in order to maintain proper order and discipline. Violation of Article 112a is one such offense requiring mandatory separation regardless of time in service or grade. Violations of this policy result in , at a minimum, mandatory processing for an administrative separation which usually results in an unfavorable characterization of discharge or, at a maximum, a punitive discharge and possible confinement if adjudicated and awarded as part of a sentence by a special or general court-martial. B ased on the seriousness of the offense and lack of mitigating factors, the NDRB determined the awarded discharge was appropriate and an upgrade was not warranted.

: ( ) RELIEF NOT WARRANTED. The Applicant is seeking an upgrade based on post service conduct, which consist of the attainment of a Bachelor of Science in Business Administration and employment as an Airport Security Officer for the City of Houston. He provided a copy of his degree and certificate for completing the Basic Airport Operations Assistant course (60 hours). The NDRB commends the Applicant for his post service accomplishments, however, t here is no law or regulation which provides an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in civilian life subsequent to leaving the service. The NDRB is authorized to consider outstanding post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge 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. Documentation to help support a post service conduct upgrade includes, but is not limited to: a verifiable continuous employment record; marriage and children’s birth certificate (if applicable); character witness statements; 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 companies, or other financial institutions; and documentation of a drug free lifestyle. 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.

While the Board commends the Applicant for his education achievement,
to warrant an upgrade the Applicant’s post service efforts need to be more encompassing. The Applicant could have produced additional evidence as stated in the above paragraph with the full understanding completion of these items alone does not guarantee an upgrade. The Board determined the characterization of service received, “General (Under Honorable Conditions)”, was an appropriate characterization considering the time served and the UCMJ violations involved, and based on the limited post service documentation provided 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

Pertinent Regulation/Law

A . The Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 27, effective 27 March 2000 until
11 February 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, Drug abuse.


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 or for any basis wherein an Other Than Honorable Discharge is authorized, 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 | 2007_Navy | ND0700848

    Original file (ND0700848.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    With the admission of use and possession by the Applicant, Captain’s Mast and Urinalysis is not a pre-requisite for administrative separation due to drug abuse.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. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900939

    Original file (ND0900939.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The discharge was inequitable because it was based on an isolatedincident.2. discharge. ” 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.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900052

    Original file (ND0900052.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Should the Applicant obtain additional evidence or post service documentation he may wish to apply for a personal appearance. The Board determined the characterization of service received, “Under Other Than Honorable Conditions”, was an appropriate characterization considering the length of service and the UCMJ violations involved, and based on the limited post service documentation provided an upgrade would be inappropriate.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901302

    Original file (ND0901302.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    ex-GMSN, USN Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request Application Received: 20090409 Characterization of Service Received: Narrative Reason for Discharge: (DRUG ABUSE) Authority for Discharge: MILPERSMAN Applicant’s Request: Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USNR (DEP) 20040615 - 20040907 Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20040908 Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: Years Extension Date of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900446

    Original file (ND0900446.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. ” 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0601091

    Original file (ND0601091.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Regarding equity, the Board found the discharge: Discussion Narrative reason change: Commander Naval Personnel directed the Applicant’s discharge by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse after reviewing the administrative discharge package forwarded by U. S. Naval Security Force, Bahrain. The record documents his administrative discharge board and commanding officer’s recommendation for separation by reason of misconduct by drug abuse with a characterization of service as under other than...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900641

    Original file (ND0900641.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USNR (DEP)20070117 - 20070212Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20070213Age at Enlistment:Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20080222Highest Rank/Rate:SKSNLength of Service: YearMonth(s)10 Day(s)Education Level:AFQT: 55EvaluationMarks:Performance:NFIRBehavior:NFIROTA: NFIRAwards and Decorations (per DD 214):Periods of UA/CONF:...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800680

    Original file (ND0800680.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall MISCONDUCT (DRUG ABUSE).Discussion (): RELIEF NOT WARRANTED.The Applicant did not present any issues however, it is assumed from the certificates provided the Applicant is requesting an upgrade in the characterization of his discharge based on post service conduct. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800576

    Original file (ND0800576.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) DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE...

  • 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,...