Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001805
Original file (ND1001805.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-AMAR, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20100713
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)        20010228 - 20010311     Active:   20010312 - 20041030 HON

Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Current Enlistment: 20041031     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20070607      Highest Rank/Rate: AM2
Length of Service : Y ear ( s ) M onth ( s ) 08 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 75
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 4.0 ( 4 )      Behavior: 2.0 ( 4 )        OTA: 3.36
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):     

Periods of UA :

NJP:
- 20050610 :      Article (Insubordinate c onduct)
                  Awarded:         Suspended: (15 days)

-20060721 :      Article (Drunken o peration of a v ehicle)
                  Awarded: Suspended:

SCM:
- 20070504 :      Article (Drugs - marijuana 30 ng/ml)
         Sentence: (20070504 - 20070528, 24 days )

SPCM:    C C :

Retention Warning Counseling:
- 20050610 :       For vi olations of the UCMJ A rticle 91 ( I nsubordination) as determined by Captain’s Mast that was held on 20050610.
- 20060721:      For Officer in Charge’s NJP on 21 July 2006 VUCMJ, Article 111 ( D runken operation of a vehicle).

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

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

          Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, should read: “ NAVY AND MARINE CORPS ACHIEVEMENT MEDAL (2), NAVY “E” RIBBON, NAVY GOOD CONDUCT MEDAL, NATIONAL DEFENSE SERVICE MEDAL, GLOBAL WAR ON TERRORISM EXPEDITIONARY MEDAL, GLOBAL WAR ON TERRORISM SERVICE MEDAL, SEA SERVICE DEPLOYMENT RIBBON. ”
Block 29, Dates of Time Lost During This Period, should read: 20070504 - 20070528)
         
The NDRB will recommend to the Commander, 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:           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 Naval Military Per sonnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 11, effective 29 April 2005 until
1 June 2008, 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.       The Applicant contends his e xemplary record of service with only a few violations and good evaluations warrant consideration for upgrading his discharge to General (Under Honorable Conditions).
2.       H e was n ot counseled by his commanding officer, who had a duty to consider his record of service and the traumatic experience he was suffering due to the tragic death of his wife.
3.       H e h as since rehabilitated himself, begun a new life with a new family, and has an impeccable employment record , suggesting his post - service conduct and achievements warrant consideration for upgrading his discharge to General (Under Honorable Conditions) .

Decision

Date: 20 1 1 0825             Location: Washington D.C .        R epresentation :

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 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 NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13) warnings and non-judicial punishments (NJP s ) for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article ( Insubordinate conduct , ) and Article ( Drunken driving , ) . His record of service also included summary court-martial for of the UCMJ: Article ( Wrongful use of a controlled substance, ). The Applicant did not require a pre-service drug waiver to enter the Navy. Based on the Article 112a violation, processing for administ rative separation is mandatory. When notified of administrative separation processing using the procedure, the Applicant rights to consult with a qualified coun sel, submit a written statement , and request an administrative board .

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his exemplary record of service with only a few violations and good evaluations warr ant consideration for upgrad ing his discharge to General (Under Honorable Conditions). Despite a service member’s prior record of service, certain serious offenses warrant separation from the Navy to maintain proper order and discipline. Violation of Article 112a of the UCMJ is such an offense. Wrongful use of a controlled substance can result in an unfavorable characterization of service, 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. Even though the Applicant had multiple violations of the UCMJ prior to the Article 112a violation , his command did not pursue a punitive discharge but opted instead for the more lenient administrative discharge. The NDRB found the characterization of the Applicant ’ s discharge was equitable . Relief denied.
: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends he was n ot counseled by his commanding officer, who had a duty to consider his record of service and the trauma tic experience he was suffering due to the tragic death of his wife. The government enjoys a presumption of regularity in the conduct of its affairs. The Applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support his claim that his command acted improperly and his discharge was inequitable. There is no evidence in the record that indicates the command did not consider mitigating factors or extenuating circumstances such as the Applicant’s record of service or his traumatic experience. T he command ing officer ’s decision not to pursue a punitive discharge, but opt for the more lenient administrative discharge , suggest s that he did c onsid er the Applicant’s record of service and tragedy as mitigating circumstances in recommending his characterization of service. T he NDRB could not discern any impropriety or inequity in th e discharge process . Relief denied.



: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends that he h as since rehabilitated himself, begun a new life with a new family, and has an impeccable employment record , suggesting his post - service conduct and achievements warrant consideration for upgrading his discharge to General (Under Honorable Conditions) . The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the re-characterization of a discharge. However, there is no law, or regulation, that provides that an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in civilian life subsequent to leaving the service. Normally, to permit relief, a procedural impropriety or inequity must have been found to exist during the period of enlistment in question. The post-service documentation the Applicant submitted along with the DD Form 293 was not sufficient to thoroughly evaluate his post-service character and conduct. His efforts needed to have been more encompassing. For example, he could have provided evidence of the following: verifiable continuous employment record, 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 financial institutions (including banks and credit card companies), a ttendance at or completion of higher education (official transcripts), and documentation of a drug-free lifestyle. 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. 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 for more information.


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 Disabled American 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 their 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 | 2014_Navy | ND1401215

    Original file (ND1401215.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. There is no requirement or law that grants recharacterization solely on the issue of obtaining veterans benefits and this issue does not serve to...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1401750

    Original file (ND1401750.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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001410

    Original file (ND1001410.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Regulations limit the NDRB’s review to a determination of the propriety and equity of the discharge.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries and the administrative separation 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901075

    Original file (MD0901075.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Regulations limit the NDRB’s review to a determination of the propriety and equity of the discharge.For future consideration, the Applicant’s request for an upgrade could be considered if he provided additional documentation and evidence on his behalf to support a post-service conduct review. 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 The characterization of service shall...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1400327

    Original file (ND1400327.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.

  • USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1300117

    Original file (MD1300117.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The use of marijuana was a conscious decision to violate the tenets of honorable and faithful service.After an exhaustive review, the NDRB determined PTSD did not mitigate the Applicant’s misconduct.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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1001001

    Original file (MD1001001.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Despite a servicemember’s prior record of service, certain serious offenses, even though isolated, warrant separation from the Naval Service in order to maintain good order and discipline; violation of Article 112a meets this standard.The Applicant signed the Marine Corps Policy Concerning Illegal Use of Drugs on 25 October 2005and received a waiver, for pre-service use of marijuana ten times, during his enlistment accession processing. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1401244

    Original file (ND1401244.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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700687

    Original file (MD0700687.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s conduct during the current period of service, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service was marred by the award of two retention warnings and found guilty at a Special Courts-Martial for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Article92 (Failure to obey a lawful order, Failure to obey a lawful regulation, Dereliction of Duty), Article 107 [False Official Statement (two specifications)], and Article 134 (Adultery). After a thorough...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0701074

    Original file (ND0701074.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Applicant’s Issues:1. Additionally, the Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities. ” Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records can grant this type of narrative reason change.