Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900152

Original file (ND0900152.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-BMSN, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20081028

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)      20020511 - 20020529     Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment: 20020530     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20070202      Highest Rank/Rate: BM3
Length of Service : Y ear ( s ) M onth ( s ) 03 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 78
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 4.0 ( 2 )      Behavior: 2.5 ( 2 )        OTA: 3.41

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      ESWS

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP :
- 20030724 :       Art icle 92 ( Violate a lawful general order – entering Mexican border area w/o an approved liberty chit )
         Awarded : Susp ended :

- 20061212 :       Article 112a (Drug use – marijuana 29 ng/ml )
         Awarded : Susp ended :

S CM : SPCM: C C : Retention Warning Counseling :

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. Punishment did not fit the crime.
2. Misdiagnosis with Hepatitis C contributed to his misconduct.

Decision

Date: 20 0 9 0218 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 the punishment he received didn’t fit the crime. 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 r ecord of service was marred by two violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation – entering the Mexican border area without an approved liberty chit) and Article 112a ( Drug use, w rongful use of a controlled substance – marijuana). The NDRB advises the Applicant certain serious offenses warrant separation from the service to maintain proper order and discipline. Violation of Article 112a is one such offense requiring mandatory separation regardless of time in service , grade or record of service . Violations of this policy result in, at a minimum, mandatory processing for an administrative separation which usually results in an unfavorable characterization of discharge (i.e., Under O ther Than H onorable conditions ) 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. The command did not pursue a punitive discharge but opted instead for an administrative discharge . The Board determined the awarded discharge characterization was within established guidelines and policy and was not unjust for the offense committed; an upgrade would be inappropriate.

Issue 2: (Equity) RELIEF NOT WARRANTED. The Applicant contends he is entitled to an upgrade because a medical misdiagnosis was the cause of his misconduct. The Board recognizes the stress the Applicant was under from his medical issues however, t he evidence of record does not demonstrate the Applicant was not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions based on this misdiagnosis . The Board determined the awarded discharge characterization was appropriate and an upgrade 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 under review, is considered during Board reviews. Docum entation 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; attending or completion of higher education (official transcripts) and documentation of alcohol non-dependency and 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.

Besides the Applicant ’s statement on the DD Form 293 and copies of documents related to his administrative separation and medical treatment, he failed to provide any additional documentation and evidence on his behalf. To warrant an upgrade the Applicant’s post - service efforts need to be more encompassing to mitigate the misconduct which precipitated the discharge .

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 Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, prov ided an application is received at the NDRB within 15 years from the date of discharge. Should the Applicant feel at some later time his post - service conduct is worthy of personally presenting to the NDRB there are organizations, such as the American Legion, willing to provide guidance and assistance in preparing such a presentation.

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 11, effective 29 April 2005 until Present, 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.

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

USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1401419

Original file (MD1401419.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. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities.
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101126

Original file (ND1101126.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)20080129 - 20080413Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20080414Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20100205Highest Rank/Rate: ATANLength of Service: Years Months 22 DaysEducation Level:AFQT: 80EvaluationMarks:Performance:3.3(3)Behavior:2.7(3)OTA: 2.92Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):NDSM...
USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1200364

Original file (MD1200364.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...
USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801569

Original file (MD0801569.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, medical and record entries, and discharge process, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reason for separation shall remain . ” 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...
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900594

Original file (MD0900594.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

PFC failed to show up to the scheduled appointment.- 20010918: For leaving on a 96 while on duty section and duty at SRD supply on 20010902. The NDRB determined the awarded discharge characterization was appropriate; an upgrade would be inappropriate.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record, Discharge Process, the Board found ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant Complaint Procedures : If you believe that the decision in your...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0902115

Original file (ND0902115.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The NDRB has no jurisdiction over reenlistment, reentry or reinstatement into the Navy, Marine Corps or any other of the Armed Forces, and is not authorized to change a reenlistment code.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entriesand discharge process, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reason for separation shall remain . ” Additional Reviews : After a...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900365

Original file (ND0900365.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Violation of Article 112a is one such offense requiring mandatory separation regardless of time in service, grade or record of service. The NDRB determined the awarded discharge characterization was appropriate and 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 ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant Complaint...
USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1500730

Original file (MD1500730.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities. ” 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 | 2015_Navy | ND1500500

Original file (ND1500500.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Based on the Article 112a violation, processing for administrative separation is mandatory. 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 remain UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS and the narrative reason for separation shall remain MISCONDUCT (DRUG ABUSE). ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been...
USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0701168

Original file (MD0701168.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

20051205 Rights Elected at Notification: Consult with Counsel Obtain Copies of Documents Submit Statement(s) (date) Not Submitted Administrative Board Commanding Officer Recommendation (date): (20060202) SJA review (date): (20060223) Separation Authority (date): CG, 1 st MARDIV (20060226) Basis for discharge directed: DUE TO Characterization directed: Date Applicant Discharged: 20060324 Types of Documents Submitted by Applicant and Considered By BoardRelated to Military Service: Service...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900152

Similar Decisions