Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900826
Original file (ND0900826.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-SR, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20090225
Characterization of Service Received:
Narrative Reason for Discharge:
Authority for Discharge: MILPERSMAN 3630620

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

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive:         US N R (DEP)        19960510 - 19960717     Active:  

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment: 19960718     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 19970509      Highest Rank/Rate: SR
Length of Service : Y ear ( s ) M onth ( s ) 22 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 79
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: NFIR        Behavior: NFIR   OTA: NFIR

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):     

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP :
- 19970408 :       Art icle 86 (U nauthorized absence )
         Article 112 (Drunk on duty)
         Article 112a ( Drug abuse, w rongful use of 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 :


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

Applicant’s Issues
1. Reenlistment o pportunities .
2. Youth .
3. Not offered alcohol or drug treatment while on active duty.

Decision

Date : 20 0 9 0528    Location: Washington D.C .       R epresentation :

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
 By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall MISCONDUCT .
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 co ntends his problems in the Navy can be attributed to mistake s he made while being young , the availability of alcohol and ente rtainment, and not being offered alcohol or drug treatment. 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 one NJP for violation s of the Uniform Code of Military Justice : Article 86 (Unauthorized absence), Article 112 (Drunk on duty) and Article 112a ( W rongful use of a controlled substance , marijuana ) . The Applicant did have a pre-service drug waiver for possession of marijuana (under fifty grams). The NDRB advises the Applicant certain serious offenses warrant separ ation 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 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. The command did not pursue a punitive discharge but opted instead for an administrative discharge.

The Applicant provided no documentation in support of his request for an upgrade due to his youth. While he may feel his youth was the underlying cause of his misconduct, the record of evidence does not demonstrate the Applicant was not responsible for his misconduct or should not be held accountable for his actions due to youth. Relief denied.
For the edification of the Applicant, all service members separated for drug abuse are screened for drug dependency and provided the option of treatment prior to separation. The intent of this treatment is for the benefit of the Applicant after discharge, not to rehabilitate the Applicant for continued service. The Report of Medical Examination for separation from the Navy states the Applicant refused Level III treatment for substance abuse because he did not feel he was addicted to marijuana. In regards to alcohol treatment , the Applicant could h ave referred himself to the command’s Substance Abuse and Rehabilitation Program a dvisor at any time to receive the necessary help if he truly felt he had an alcohol problem. The Board determined the awarded characterization of discharge 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 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 rev iewed 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, he provided only in- service documentation as evidence on his behalf. The Applican t could have produced post-service 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 se rvice received, Under Other Than Honorable Conditions , was an appropriate characterization considering the length of service and the UCMJ violations in volved, and without any post-service documentation 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 . Navy Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 14, effective 3 October 1996 until
11 December 1997, Article 3630620, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL 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 s of the UCMJ, Article 112 (Drunk on duty) and 112a (Wrongful use of a controlled substance) .

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 | 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1101549

    Original file (MD1101549.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Based on the violation of Article 112(a), processing for administrative separation, by service policy, was mandatory.The Applicant was notified - in writing - of the Command’s intent to process the Applicant for administrative separation for Misconduct (Drug Abuse) in accordance with paragraph 6210.5 of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual (MARCORSEPMAN). On 01 March 2004, the Separation Authority approved the request that the Applicant be separated administratively with an...

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1000261

    Original file (MD1000261.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. Relief 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801960

    Original file (MD0801960.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall COURT-MARTIAL.Discussion :().The Applicant contends he deserves better than a “Bad Conduct” discharge after serving many years in the Marine Corps and taking part in Operation Iraqi Freedom in 2003. ” 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1100574

    Original file (MD1100574.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant was notified - in writing - of the Command’s intent to process him for administrative separation due to Misconduct (Drug Abuse) in accordance with paragraph 6210.5 of the MARCORSEPMAN - with a recommendation for characterization of service as Under Other Than Honorable Conditions. Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, service record entries, and the discharge process, the NDRB determined that Therefore, the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000019

    Original file (ND1000019.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board determined an upgrade would be inappropriate.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. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801512

    Original file (ND0801512.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board determined based on the lack of post service documentation provided an upgrade would be inappropriate and the characterization of service received, “Under Other Than Honorable”, was an appropriate characterization considering the time served and the nature of the UCMJ violations involved.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found Pertinent...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1300822

    Original file (ND1300822.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. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001200

    Original file (ND1001200.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 09 July 1997, the Separation Authority directed the Applicant be discharged for the reason as stated and that he receive an RE-4 re-enlistment code - not recommended for re-enlistment. Based on a review of the evidence of record and circumstances unique to this case, the NDRB determined that the Applicant’s misconduct did properly satisfy the requirements established by the MILPERSMAN for separation based on the commission of a serious offense, a pattern of misconduct, and drug abuse. ”...

  • USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1300958

    Original file (MD1300958.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD13-00958 a ~ ' ,ex-PFC, USMC CURRENT DISCHARGE AND APPLICANT *§ REQUEST Application Received: 20130314 Characterization of Service Received: (corrected) UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS Narrative Reason for Discharge: (per DD 214) MISCONDUCT Authority for Discharge: (per DD 214) MARCORSEPMAN 6210.5 [DRUGS] Applicant’s Request: Characterization change to: GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS) Narrative Reason change to: NONE REQUESTED SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service: Inactive: USMCR...