Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201719

Original file (ND1201719.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-MM2, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20120822

Characterization of Service Received:

Narrative Reason for Discharge:
Authority for Discharge: MILPERSMAN

Applicant’s Request: Characterization change to:
         Narrative Reason change to: VOLUNTARY DISCHARGE AT END OF ACTIVE OBLIGATED                                           SERVICE

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive:         US N R (DEP)        20051031 - 20060410     Active:

Pre-Service Drug Waiver:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20060411     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years /20 DAYS Extension
Date of Discharge: 20120420      Highest Rank/Rate: MM1
Length of Service : Y ear s M onth s 10 D a ys
Education Level:        AFQT: 99
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 3.2 ( 11 )     Behavior: 2.6 ( 11 )       OTA: 3.14

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Pistol (3) SWSBI SSBNDPP

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP:

- 20090521 :      Article (Drunken or reckless operation of a vehicle, aircraft, or vessel , on or about 17 May 2009, physically controlled a vehicle with a blood alcohol content above the legal limit of .08 (.133)
         Article (Failed to obey order or regulation , violated drug/alcohol awareness policy statement by operating a motor v ehicle after consuming alcohol)
         Awarded: Suspended:

- 20100929 :      Article (Failure to obey order or regulation , dereliction of duties in that he negligently failed to properly use the procedure for cleaning and inspecting the PLO strainers)
         Awarded: Suspended:

- 20120109 :      Article (Wrongful use, possession, etc. of controlled substances , amphetamine 886 ng/ml and methamphetamine 995 ng/ml )
         Awarded: Susp ended:

SCM:     SPCM:    CC: NFIR

CIVIL ARREST:

- 20090517 :       Charges: Driving Under the Influence; reference NJP dated 20090521

Retention Warning Counseling :

- 20090526 :       For violation of UCMJ Article 111 (Drunken or reckless operation of a vehicle, aircraft, or vessel; on or about 17 May 2009)

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 29, effective 10 November 2009 until Present, 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 discharge is inequitable based on the inconsistent manner of standards of discipline being applied , specifically having a witness under sworn testimony confessing to having caused him to unknowingly ingest a controlled substance .
2.       The Applicant contends his quality of service was significantly above average , and the completion of his enlistment term merits review.

Decision

Date: 20 1 3 0502             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 Board did complete a thorough review of the circumstances that led to discharge and the discharge process to ensure discharge met the pertinent sta ndards of equity and propriety. The Applicant’s record of service included NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13) warning , for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article ( Failure to obey order or regulation , ), Article ( Drunken or reckless operation of a vehicle, aircraft, or vessel ), and Article ( Wrongful use, possession, etc. of controlled substances , amphetamine 886 ng/ml and methamphetamine 995 ng/ml ) , and one civilian arrest for Driving under the influence . 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 a n administrative board . The administrative board found, by a vote of 2 to 1, that the preponderance of evidence support ed M isconduct (P attern of M isconduct ) and, by a vote of 3 to 0, that the preponderance of evidence support ed M isconduct (D rug A buse ) . Additionally, the administrative board recommended separation by a vote of 3 to 0, and by a vote of 2 to 1 recommended an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions c haracterization of service.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his discharge is inequitable based on the inconsistent manner of standards of discipline being applied , specifically having a witness under sworn testimony confessing to having caused him to unknowingly ingest a controlled substance . 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. The Applicant tested positive for amphetamine and methamphetamine during a random urinalysis and was found guilty at NJP of violating UCMJ Article 112a . Additionally, an administrative board found, by unanimous vote, that the preponderance of evidence support ed M isconduct (D rug A buse ) . The NDRB reviewed all of the discharge proceedings, including the statement from the witness who took responsibility for adding a controlled substance to his protein shake. Based upon available records, nothing indicates that the Applicant’s discharge was in any way inconsistent with the standards of discipline in the United States Navy. The NDRB determined that separation from the Naval Service was appropriate and that an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge was warranted. Relief denied.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his quality of service was significantly above average, and the completion of his enlistment term merits review. In support of this issue, he submitted letters of support, supervisor statements, evaluation reports, awards, and advancement documentation. The Applicant was administratively separated and not separated upon expiration of enlistment or fulfillment of service obligation. Due to voluntary contract extensions, the Applicant’s End of Active Obligated Service was 30 April 2012. The Applicant was administratively separated on 20 April 2012. Despite a servicemember’s prior record of service, certain serious offenses warrant separation from the to maintain proper order and discipline. Violation of Article 112a is one such offense

requiring mandatory processing for administrative separation regardless of grade, performance, awards, or time in service. This usually results in an unfavorable characterization of discharge 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. However, 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 of discharge given others in similar circumstances. 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 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

USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1001603

Original file (MD1001603.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, 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200679

Original file (ND1200679.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...
USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1100205

Original file (MD1100205.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant was separated from the Marine Corps on 25 July 2008 with an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge due to Misconduct (Drug Abuse). The Applicant, as a combat veteran, is encouraged to contact the VA for more information at http://www4.va.gov/healtheligibility/Library/pubs/CombatVet/CombatVet.pdf or 1-877-222-VETS (8387).Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries and discharge process, the...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0902357

Original file (ND0902357.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)20020117 - 20020128Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20020129Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20030812Highest Rank/Rate: SALength of Service: Year(s)Month(s)26 Day(s)Education Level:AFQT: 39EvaluationMarks:Performance:NFIR()Behavior:NFIR()OTA: NFIRAwards and Decorations (per DD 214):Periods...
USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201340

Original file (MD1201340.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

After a thorough review of the Applicant’s service and medical records and substantial documentation provided by the Applicant, the NDRB determined his mental condition did not mitigate his extensive and repetitive misconduct. The Applicant could have provided documentation as detailed in the Post-Service Conduct paragraph in the Addendum , however, completion of these items alone does not guarantee an upgrade from an unfavorable discharge as each discharge is reviewed by the Board on a...
USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1200855

Original file (MD1200855.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 | 2010_Marine | MD1000112

Original file (MD1000112.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: Pertinent Regulation/Law A. Therefore, no relief...
USMC | DRB | 2014_Marine | MD1400348

Original file (MD1400348.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 .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 conducted, former members are...
NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201131

Original file (ND1201131.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, the administrative separation process, and documentation submitted on behalf of the Applicant, the Board found the discharge was proper and equitable at the time of discharge. However,based on substantial post-service medical evidence and other documentation submitted to the Board, the NDRB determined that PTSD mitigated his misconduct and so the awarded...
USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1101686

Original file (MD1101686.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 .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 conducted, former members are...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201719

Similar Decisions