Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100440

Original file (ND1100440.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-AA, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20101208

Characterization of Service Received:

Narrative Reason for Discharge:
Authority for Discharge: MILPERSMAN

Applicant’s Request: Characterization change to:
                  Narrative Reason change to: CONVENIENCE OF THE GOVERNMENT

Summary of Service
Prior Service:
Inactive:         US N R (DEP)        20030716 - 20030727     Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20030728     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20070413      Highest Rank/Rate: AN
Length of Service : Y ear s M onth s 15 D a ys
Education Level:        AFQT: 43
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 3.3 ( 4 )      Behavior: 2.5 ( 4 )        OTA: 3.25
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      NDSM SSDR GWOTEM GCM

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP: 1
- 20070124 :      Article (Wrongful use of controlled substance, marijuana, 55 ng/ml THC, NAVDRUGLAB msg 101310Z JAN 07)
         Awarded: RIR [Extracted from Performance Evaluation dated 200704013] Suspended: NFIR

SCM: NONE         SPCM:    C C :

Retention Warning Counseling : 1
- 20070124 :       NFIR

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

The NDRB did note administrative errors on the original DD Form 214:

“GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS) ”
         “ MISCONDUCT (DRUG ABUSE) ”

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:                  Oth er Documentation:
                  Additional Statements :
         From Applicant:          From /To Representation:          From /To Congress m ember :

Pertinent Regulation/Law

A. The Naval Military Personnel 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 it is unfair to continue to suffer the adverse effects of his discharge.
2.       The Applicant contends his record of service outweighs his misconduct.
3.       The Applicant contends his discharge is inequitable , because it was based on an isolated incident.
4.       The Applicant believes his post-service conduct is worthy of consideration.
5.       The Applicant contends that working in a field in which he was not tr ained led to a weakening of his ability .
6.       The Applicant seeks to change the n arrative reason to Convenience of the Government.

Decision

Date: 201 2 0109             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 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 Board did complete a thorough review of the circumstances that led to discharge and the discharge process to ensure the pertinent standards of equity and propriety were met. The Applicant’s record of service included NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13) warning and for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article (Wrongful use, possession of a controlled substance, marijuana, 55 ng/ml NAVDRUGLAB msg 101310Z JAN 07 ). The Applicant a pre-service drug waiver for using marijuana five times prior to entering the Navy. Based on the offenses committed by the Applicant, command administratively processed for separation. Based on the Article 112a violation, processing for administrative separation is mandatory. When notified of administrative separation processing using the procedure, the Applicant rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request an administrative board.

: ( D ecisional) (Equity) RELIEF NOT WARRANTED. The Applicant contends it is unfair to continue to suffer the adverse effects of his discharge. 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 N aval S ervice.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends he received awards, decorations, letters of recommendation, and served in Operation Iraqi Freedom , therefore , suggesting his record of service warrants consideration for upgrading his discharge to Honorable. Despite a service member’s prior record of service, certain serious offenses , even though isolated, 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 t he Applicant violat ed Article 112a of the UCMJ, 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 and consistent with the characterization given others in similar circumstances. Relief denied.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his discharge is inequitable, because it was based on an isolated incident in over 4 5 months of service . Despite a servicemember’s prior record of service, certain serious offenses, even though isolated, warrant separation from the Navy to maintain proper order and discipline. Violation of Article 112a is one such offense requiring mandatory processing for administrative separation regardless of grade or time in service. The Applicant was found guilty of violation of Article 112a. However, his command did not pursue a punitive discharge but opted instead for the more lenient administrative discharge. Relief denied.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends that his post-service conduct warrants consideration for upgrading the characterization of his service to Honorable. 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 good conduct in civilian life subsequent to leaving the service. The Applicant submitted several certificates of completion for courses . This documentation submitted along with the DD Form 293 was not sufficient to evaluate his post-service character and conduct. He could have submitted documentation as specified in the Post-Service Conduct paragraph in the Addendum , however, submission 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.

Issue 5: ( Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends that working in a fie ld in which he was not trained led to his impaired ability . The NDRB recognizes that serving in the U.S. Navy is challenging. M ost members serve honorably , however, despite their job assignment s , and therefore earn their H onorable discharges. In fairness to those members of the Navy, commanders and separation authorities are tasked to ensure that undeserving Sailors receive no higher characterization than is due. The NDRB found that the Applicant ’ s service was equitably characterized. Relief denied.

Issue 6: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant seeks to change his narrative reason to Convenience of the Government. The Applicant was discharged for Misconduct due to Drug Abuse per the Naval Military Personnel Manual (NAVPERS 15560C) after he tested positive for the use of marijuana. Per this manual, the Narrative Reason for Separation on the DD Form 214 shall read “Misconduct (Drug Abuse) .” No other narrative reason more clearly describes the circumstances surrounding the Applicant’s processing for administrative separation. 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 Additional Reviews, Automatic Upgrades, 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 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

USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1002234

Original file (MD1002234.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

As a result, you received NJP on 20070124 and were found guilty under the UCMJ of violation of Article 112a.- 20061212:For your misconduct, specifically your positive urinalysis for THC on 20061212. Applicant wants his discharge upgraded so he can reenlist in the military.2. ” 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1401235

Original file (ND1401235.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends he never wrongfully used drugs.2. 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...
USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1200607

Original file (MD1200607.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Relief denied.Issue 5: (Decisional) () .The Applicant contends his record of service, specifically his three deployments, warrants consideration for upgrading his discharge.Despite a service member’s record of service, to include combat service, certain serious offenses warrant separation from the Marine Corps to maintain proper order and discipline. Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, and...
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901728

Original file (MD0901728.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Relief based on this issue is 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1500417

Original file (ND1500417.rtf) Auto-classification: 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 change to GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS) and the narrative reason for separation shall remain MISCONDUCT (DRUG ABUSE). ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the...
NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1500403

Original file (ND1500403.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900423

Original file (ND0900423.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant contends his discharge should be upgraded based on his record of service which was good apart from a single period of misconductand he did not have a pattern of misconduct because it was based on an isolated incident “…stemming from a conflict-of-interest situation …” 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. ...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900622

Original file (ND0900622.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

In addition to requesting an upgrade in the characterization of service, the Applicant is seeking a change in the narrative reason for reentry into the military. The Board determined the characterization of service received, “Under Other Than Honorable Conditions”, was an appropriate characterization considering the length of service, UCMJ violations involved, and lack of post service documentation.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of...
NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700344

Original file (ND0700344.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, medical and service record entries, discharge process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found that Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USNR (DEP) 20030228 - 20031112 Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20031113Years Contracted:; Extension: Date of Discharge: 20051209Length of Service: 02Yrs 00Mths27 Dys Lost Time: Education Level: Age at...
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900604

Original file (MD0900604.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The NDRB determined clemency was not warranted.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Service and Medical Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found clemency was not warranted and the sentence awarded the Applicant at his court-martial was appropriate for the offenses he committed. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100440

Similar Decisions