Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100902

Original file (ND1100902.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-ETSN, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20110223

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)        20000111 - 20000221     Active:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20000222     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20041216      Highest Rank/Rate: ET3
Length of Service : Y ear s M onth s 24 D a ys
Education Level: 12      AFQT: 62
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: NFIR         Behavior: NFIR OTA: NFIR

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle Pistol NDSM GCM BATTLE “ E”

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP: 1
- 20041008 :      Article 81 (Conspiracy , conspired to bring three pounds of marijuana and an undisclosed amount of cocaine onboard a Naval Station )
         Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation)
         Awarded: RIR FOP RESTR EPD Suspended:

SCM: NONE        SPCM: C C :     Retention Warning Counseling : NONE

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 ”

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), 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 .

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

Applicant’s Issues

1.        The Applicant seeks an upgrade to re-enlist in the U. S. Navy.
2.       The Applicant contends he has never been involved in illegal drug use nor any other unlawful activity related to the distribution or use of illegal drugs.
3 .       The Applicant contends he was entrapped into participating in the purchase of illegal drugs.

Decision

Date : 20 1 2 0223    Location: Washington D.C .       R epresentation : Civilian counsel

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 Board did complete a thorough review of the circumstances that led to discharge and the discharge process to ensure discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety. The Applicant’s record of service included one nonjudicial punishment for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 81 (Conspiracy, conspired to bring three pounds of marijuana and an undisclosed amount of cocaine onboard a Naval Station) and Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation). The Applicant did not have a pre-service waiver for illicit drug use prior to entering the Navy. Based on the violation of the Navy’s Zero-Tolerance Drug Policy, processing for administ rative separation is mandatory. When notified of administrative separation processing using the administrative board procedure, the Applicant exercised his right to submit a written statement, but waived his right s to consult with a qualified coun sel and appear before an administrative separation board.

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant seeks an upgrade to re-enlist in the U. S. Navy. 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 B oard for Correction of Naval Records 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.

Issues 2-3: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends he has never been involved in illegal drug use nor any other unlawful activity related to the distribution or use of illegal drugs. The Applicant contends he was entrapped into participating in the purchase of illegal drugs. 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 issue. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the Applicant produced any evidence, to support the contentions that he was not guilty in the above charges. The Applicant’s commanding officer determined that a preponderance of the evidence demonstrated that the Applicant was in violation of the Navy’s Zero-Tolerance Drug Policy. In his separation recommendation, he stated that “(Applicant) admitted to conspiring with a fellow Sailor to bring three pounds of marijuana and an undisclosed amount of cocaine. The evidence presented clearly supports a violation of the Navy’s ‘zero tolerance’ program….” The NDRB discerned no impropriety or inequity in the discharge proceedings or the characterization of service. The Applicant’s statements alone do not overcome the government’s presumption of regularity in this case. 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 | MD1000909

Original file (MD1000909.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The record also reflected that the Applicant had a pre-service drug waiver for using marijuana prior to entering the Marine Corps, and acknowledged complete understanding of the Marine Corps Policy Concerning Illegal Use of Drugs on 16 May 1994. The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of service, reflects his willful failure to meet the requirements of conduct expected of all Marines and falls far short of what is required for an upgrade in the...
NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600049

Original file (ND0600049.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. ), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.000329: An Administrative Discharge Board, based upon a preponderance of the evidence and by unanimous vote, found that the Applicant had committed misconduct due to drug abuse that such misconduct warranted separation, and...
NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200809

Original file (ND1200809.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant seeks an upgrade to enhance employment and educational opportunities.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 of discharge. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a...
NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1002259

Original file (ND1002259.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.Applicant contends his discharge was inequitable, because it was based on an isolated incident in 48 months of service. In accordance with section 1553 (d)(2), the service secretary expedited a final decision and accorded the case sufficient priority to achieve an expedited resolution.The NDRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s...
NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001570

Original file (ND1001570.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.Applicant seeks an upgrade to obtain veteran education benefits.2. The Applicant was separated from the Navy on 23 Feb 2001 with an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge due to Misconduct (Drug Abuse). ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received...
NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001776

Original file (ND1001776.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.Applicant contends his discharge was inequitable based on his total record of service and because his misconduct occurred while on leave. Relief denied.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...
NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0701173

Original file (ND0701173.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 Date Applicant Responded to Notification: NOT FOUND IN RECORD Rights Elected at Notification: Consult with Counsel Obtain Copies of Documents Submit Statement(s) (date) Administrative Board GCMCA review Commanding Officer Recommendation (date): Separation Authority (date): NOT FOUND IN...
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100809

Original file (ND1100809.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: DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD...
NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301533

Original file (ND1301533.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: DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD...
NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000586

Original file (ND1000586.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

On 08 April 2009, the Separation Authority approved the Command’s recommendation for discharge and designated that the basis for separation would be Misconduct (Commission of a Serious Offense), having determined that the evidence of record supported the discharge and that the characterization of service as recommended, was warranted. The Separation Authority reviewed the evidence of record and the gravity of the charges and directed the Applicant be discharged for Misconduct (Commission of...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100902

Similar Decisions