Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900752
Original file (ND0900752.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-FT2, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20090213
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)        20001212 - 20010109     Active:            20010110 - 20041203

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment: 20041204     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20060131      Highest Rank/Rate: FT2
Length of Service : Y ear ( s ) M onth ( s ) 28 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 46
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 4.0 ( 2 )      Behavior: 2.0 ( 3 )        OTA: 2.86

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      NEM

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP :
- 20050914 :       Art icle 112a (Drug abuse - marijuana)
         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 :

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 .


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

Applicant’s Issues

1. Reenlistment purposes.
2. Cannabis use in September 2005 was an isolated incident.

Decision

Date: 20 0 9 0507             Location: Washington D.C .        R epresentation :

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

Discussion

: The Applicant is seeking an upgrade to honorable in hopes of resuming his military career. This is 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 s , for additional information regarding .

: ( ) . In seeking an upgrade, the Applicant contends his use of Cannabis in 2005 was an isolated incident. Additionally, he has submitted copies of in-service records (awards, citations, and performance e valuations ) and character references for the Board’s consideration. 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 NDRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an Applicant's discharge, will change the reason for discharge or characterization of service if such a change is warranted. The NDRB advises the Applicant 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. The Applicant’s record of service was marred by one NJP for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 112a (Drug abuse – marijuana). He was notified of administrative separation processing on 16 November 2 00 5 and elected an A dministrative S eparation B oard (ASB) . The A SB was convened on 14 December 2005 and by a unanimous vote found misconduct due to drug abuse and recommended separation with an other than honorable (OTH) discharge. The commanding officer concurred with the recommendation and the Applicant was discharged with an OTH. Taking into consideration the Applicant’s in-service performance, the seriousness of the offense committed, and other factors unique to this case , the NDRB determined an upgrade to honorable is not warranted. Therefore, relief is denied.

For edification of the Applicant, t he 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. 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.

To warrant an upgrade the Applicant’s post service efforts need to be more encompassing. The Applicant could have produced
documentary 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, “Under Other Than Honorable

Conditions”, was an appropriate characterization considering the length of service, the UCMJ violation involved, and lac k of post service documentation .

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 NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational opportunities. Regulations limit the NDRB ’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 NDRB 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 NDRB 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 NDRB B oard 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 | 2008_Navy | ND0801376

    Original file (ND0801376.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USNR (DEP)20050521 - 20051205Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20051206Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20070307Length of Service: YearMonths02 DaysEducation Level: Age at Enlistment:AFQT:75Highest Rank/Rate:ETXNEvaluationMarks:Performance:NFIR Behavior:NFIROTA:NFIRAwards and Decorations (per DD 214):Periods of UA/CONF:...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200914

    Original file (ND1200914.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. The Applicant exercised his right to an administrative separation board, which found by a vote of 3-0 that the Applicant was guilty of misconduct due to drug abuse, 2-1 that he should be separated from the Navy but that the separation should be suspended for the remainder of the Applicant’s enlistment, and 3-0 that the characterization should be General. ” Additional Reviews...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101903

    Original file (ND1101903.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: Pertinent Regulation/Law A. DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700396

    Original file (ND0700396.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board determined that the documentation provided by the Applicant did not mitigate the circumstances 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. Additionally, the NDRB does not have the authority to change a narrative reason for separation to one indicating a medical...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000622

    Original file (ND1000622.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s separation code on his Form DD-214 indicates that the Applicant was involuntarily discharged and that no administrative discharge hearing board was required; the least favorable characterization of service that could be recommended at separation was General (Under Honorable Conditions).The Applicant’s service record documents that he was counseled and provided an opportunity to take corrective actions prior to being recommended for separation. The Applicant’s record of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1400053

    Original file (ND1400053.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00920

    Original file (ND04-00920.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant)) discharge was inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident in 65 months of service with no other adverse action.The discharge is improper because the Applicant’s pre-service civilian activity, properly listed on his enlistment documents, was used in the discharge proceedings. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant’ s DD Form 214 Texas Real Estate Commission...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101598

    Original file (ND1101598.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge based solely on actions taken by the VA.: (Decisional) () . ” 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 does not have the authority to change a narrative reason for separation to one indicating a medical disability or other medical...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1500861

    Original file (ND1500861.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/To Congress member: Pertinent Regulation/Law A. The Applicant could...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600790

    Original file (ND0600790.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. PART I - ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION Decisional Issues Propriety: Pre-service conduct considered.Equity: Isolated incident. The Applicant is advised that the Veterans Administration determines eligibility for post-service benefits not the Naval Discharge Review Board.