Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1102059
Original file (ND1102059.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-ET2, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20110831
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)        19961029 - 19970121     Active:   19970122 - 19990530 HON

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 19990531     Age at Enlistment: 20
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20050318      Highest Rank/Rate: ET2
Length of Service : Y ear s M onth s 19 D a ys
Education Level:        AFQT: 99
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 3.0 ( 2 )      Behavior: 3.0 ( 2 )        OTA: 2.93

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      LOC (5) BATTLE “ E ” GCM NUC NEM (2) NATO (KOSOVO) SSDR (2) GWOTEM NDSM

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP: 2

- 20001011 :      Article 86 (Absence without leave )
         Awarded: RIR (to E-4) FOP Suspended: RIR (suspend 6 months)
         [ *Suspended RIR v acated 20010406 due to involvement with civil authorities]

- 20020722 :      Article 128 (Assault)
         Awarded: NFIR
SCM: NFIR         SPCM:    Retention Warning Counseling : NONE

C C : 1
          - March 2001:    Charges: Driving Under the Influence (DUI)
                  Sentence: NFIR
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 970122 UNTIL 990530 ”

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.        Applicant contends he admitted to illicit drug use on a security questionnaire that stated the information would not be used for punitive measures.

Decision

Date: 20 1 2 07 25             Location: Washington D.C .        R epresentation : NONE

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 NDRB conducted a thorough review of the Applicant’s service records to determine whether his discharge met the pertinent standards for propriety and equity. The Applicant’s record of service included two nonjudicial punishments (NJPs) for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article 86 (Absence without leave) and Article 128 (Assault , assaulted a shipmate who repeatedly mustered late for watch ), and a March 2001 civilian conviction for driving under the influence. Due to a civil court requirement being reported a s delinquent, the Applicant’s command was notified by the Department of the Navy Central Adjudication Facility of the requirement to initiate a new SF86 Security Questionnaire for the Applicant’s Security Clearance . While filling out the new SF 86 document , the Applicant indicated he u s ed illegal drug s while in Navy service from November 1997 to January 2002. The Applicant’s record also re vealed the Applicant had a pre-service drug waiver for using marijuana two times prior to entering the Navy. Based on the Article 112a violation (self-admission on the SF86 Security Questionnaire) , processing for administ rative separation is mandatory per the Naval Military Personnel Manual (MILPERSMAN) . When notified of administrative separation processing using the administrative board procedure on 2 December 2004 , the Applicant elected to exercise rights to consult with a qualified coun sel, submit a written statement , and request an A dministrative S eparation B oard (ASB) . The ASB was conducted on 11 February 2005. Upon conclusion of the proceedings, the Senior Member reported the following findings to the Convening Authority: (By 3-0 vote) via a preponderance of the evidence , the Applicant committed drug abuse misconduct; (By 3-0 vote) the Applicant should be separated from the Navy; (By 3-0 vote) the Applicant should receive a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge. After considering the Applic ant’s record of service and the transcript summary, findings , and recommendations of the ASB , the Separation Authority directed that the Applicant be separated from the Navy with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge due to Misconduct (Drug Abuse) . The Applicant was discharged on 18 March 2005.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends he admitted to illicit drug use on a security questionnaire that stated th e information would not be used for punitive measures. The illicit drug use admission was not used for punitive measures, which refers to trial by court-martial (punitive action that could result in a B ad C onduct or D ishonorable D ischarge). Instead, his command processed him under administrative procedures for separation from the Naval Service for admission of illegal drug use . T he record clearly reflects his willful and repeated misconduct and demonstrated he was unfit for further service. The evidence of record does not demonstrate the Applicant was not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions. Despite a service member’s prior record of service, certain serious offenses warrant separation from the Naval Service in order to maintain good order and discipline; violation of Article 112a meets this standard. The Applicant received an enlistment waiver in 1997 for pre-service illegal use of marijuana. He was fully aware there is a zero - tolerance policy for drug use, and he acknowledged the consequences. Per the MILPERSMAN , w hen a Sailor’s service has been honest and faithful, it is appropriate to characterize that service under H onorable conditions. A General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge is warranted when the quality of the member’s service has been honest and faithful but significant negative aspects of the member’s conduct or performance of duty outweigh the positive aspects of the member’s service record. The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of service, reflects the Applicant’s willful failure to meet the requirements of conduct expected of all Sailors, especially considering his grade , experience, occupational field, and length of service, and falls short of w hat is required for an upgrade. 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 the administrative separation 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 additional 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), 701 South Courthouse Road, Suite 1001, Arlington, VA 22204-2490 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 | 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 | 2011_Navy | ND1100865

    Original file (ND1100865.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: Pertinent Regulation/Law A. DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL...

  • USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1200091

    Original file (MD1200091.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant contends his Administrative Separation Board (ASB) recommended his discharge be suspended.3. ” 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 provide...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00650

    Original file (ND02-00650.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant's of DD Form 214 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 780513 - 780917 COG Active: USN 790918 - 840830 HON USN 840831 - 871230 HON Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 871231 Date of Discharge: 890811 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 01 07...

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1001589

    Original file (MD1001589.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 . ” 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100536

    Original file (ND1100536.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. Full relief to Honorable was not granted, because the NDRB determined that misconduct did occur.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 the discharge was proper and equitable at the time of discharge. ” Additional Reviews : After a...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1002196

    Original file (ND1002196.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’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 | 2010_Marine | MD1001824

    Original file (MD1001824.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. Relief denied.Also, 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.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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700884

    Original file (MD0700884.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a thorough review of the Applicant’s record, issues submitted, and post service accomplishments, the Board determined that clemency was not warranted and that the sentence awarded the Applicant at his court-martial was appropriate for the offenses he committed.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. Medical/Service...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101769

    Original file (ND1101769.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant seeks a change to his RE Code in order to re-enlist in the Armed Forces.2. The Applicant could have provided documentation as detailed in the Post-Service Conduct paragraph in the Addendum with the recognition that completion of these items alone does not guarantee an upgrade from an unfavorable discharge as each discharge is reviewed by the Board on a case by...