Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901021
Original file (ND0901021.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-SM2, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20090317
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)        19860207 - 19860414     Active:   19860415 – 20030324 HON

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment: 20030325     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20050322      Highest Rank/Rate: SM1
Length of Service : Y ear ( s ) M onth ( s ) 25 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 73
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 3.5 ( 2 )      Behavior: 3.0 ( 2 )        OTA: 3.50

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle Pistol BER (4) (6) NEM (3) (2) (3) (3) (8) (SAUDI ARABIA) (KUWAIT) SWSI

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP :
- 20050105 :       Art icle 112a ( Drug abuse, w rongful use of a controlled substance : marijuana )
                  Awarded : Susp ended :

S CM :

SPCM:

C C :

Retention Warning Counseling :


Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

The NDRB did note administrative error(s) on the original DD Form 214:

         “ CONTINUOUS HONORABLE ACTIVE SERVICE FROM 19860415 UNTIL 20030324 ”

The NDRB will recommend to the C ommander, Navy Personnel Command , that the DD 214 be corrected as appropriate.




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 : Real Estate Cert ’s, Concealed weapon permit, Employment References

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 (Drug abuse, wrongful use of a controlled substance).




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

Applicant’s Issues

 1. Applicant claims his d ischarge was inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident in almost 19 years of service.

Decision

Date : 20 0 9 0910    Location: Washington D.C .       R epresentation :

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
 By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall MISCONDUCT .
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 discharg e if such change is warranted. In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of g overnment al affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant . The Applicant’s record of service included non - judicial punishment (NJP) for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 112a ( d rug abuse, wrongful use of a controlled substance: m arijuana - 2 specifications). The Applicant also had a pre-service drug waiver for using marijuana prior to entering the Navy. The NDRB advises the Applicant that certain serious offenses warrant separation from the service in order to maintain proper order and discipline. Violation of Article 112a is one such offense requ iring mandatory processing, regardless of time in service or grade , for administrative separation which usually results in an unfavorable characterization of discharge . Commanders may seek 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. When processed for a dministrative s eparation, the Applicant waived rights to consult with qualified counsel, but did request an a dministrative s eparation b oard (ASB), which was held on 1 February 2005. By a unanimous vote of 3-0, the ASB found that the preponderance of the evidence support ed the allegations that the Applicant used illegal drugs. T he ASB support ed separation and recommend ed a “ General ” discharge.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his discharge should be upgraded based on his record of service , which was good apart from a single period of misconduct over an 18 - year, 11 - month n aval career. Despite a Sailor’s prior record of se rvice, certain serious offenses, even though isolate d, warrant separation from the n aval service in order to maintain good order and discipline. In the NDRB’s opinion , the Applicant sealed his fate with a second positive urinalysis—had his command considered actions to retain him after the first drug offense, that position became untenable with the second confirmed use of marijuana. The Board also opined that due to his record of service, he received favorable consideration from the command and the ASB as evidenced through the awarding of a General discharge. This offense usually results in an unfavorable discharge from the Navy. Relief denied.

Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s s ummary of s ervice, r ecord e ntries, and d ischarge p rocess, 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. The Applicant is directed to the Addendum, specifically the paragraphs titled Addit ional Reviews, and Post-Service Conduct .]



ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant

 Complaint Procedures : If you believe 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 : 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. 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. There are veterans organizations such as the American Legion and the Association of Service Disable Veterans that are willing to provide guidance to former service members in their efforts to obtain a discharge upgrade. 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, DC 20370-5100 for further review.

 Service Benefits: The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) determines eligibility for post-service benefits, not the NDRB. 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.
Employment/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 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 is processed subsequently for an administrative involuntary separation or is referred to a court martial for misconduct, the disability evaluation is suspended 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 BCNR can grant this type of narrative reason change.

 Automatic Upgrades - There is no law or regulation that provides for an unfavorable discharge to be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct subsequent to leaving naval service.

Post-Service Conduct : The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. 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 support a post-service conduct upgrade includes, but is not limited to: a verifiable continuous employment record; marriage and children’s birth certificates (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; attendance at 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 reviewed by the Board on a case-by-case basis to determine if post-service accomplishments help demonstrate in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member’s overall character.

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 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 | 2011_Navy | ND1100307

    Original file (ND1100307.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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900146

    Original file (ND0900146.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant was unable during any of these proceedings to convince either his CO or the ASB he either didn’t knowingly use cocaine or the lab test was in error. Especially found credible was the testimony of Mr. S. that the Applicant could have taken cocaine on the Friday or Saturday preceding the urinalysis and still tested positive at the levels indicated in the drug test administered on 14 November 2006. The NDRB determined the awarded discharge characterization was appropriate and an...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100993

    Original file (ND1100993.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends his commanding officer’s recommendation was to not separate him. Relief denied.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 .The...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200631

    Original file (ND1200631.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends an upgrade would improve his life.2. Relief denied.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 .The Applicant remains eligible for...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200559

    Original file (ND1200559.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 8 December 2009, an Administrative Separation Board (ASB) found by a vote of 3-0 that the preponderance of the evidence did support a finding of misconduct under Naval Military Personnel Manual (MILPERSMAN) Article 1910-146 (Separation by Reason of Misconduct - Drug Abuse) and voted 3-0 to recommend separation Under Other Than Honorable Conditionsand voted 3-0 to recommend a retirement grade reduction to E-8. Relief granted.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900466

    Original file (ND0900466.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB 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 lack of post service documentation provided an upgrade would be inappropriate. ” 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...

  • 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 | 2011_Navy | ND1100779

    Original file (ND1100779.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant appeared before an Administrative Separation Board (ASB) on 09 July 2001. ” 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 | 2013_Navy | ND1301031

    Original file (ND1301031.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, medical and 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 is not eligible for further reviews from the NDRB. ”...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900320

    Original file (ND0900320.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant subsequently requested, and was granted, an Administrative Separation Board (ASB) which determined the preponderance of the evidence did not support the allegations of misconduct. 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...