Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201854
Original file (ND1201854.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-IT3, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20120830
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)        20051031 - 20051128     Active:            20051129 - 20100324 HON

Pre-Service Drug Waiver:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20100325     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20120628      Highest Rank/Rate: IT3
Length of Service : Y ear ( s ) M onth ( s ) 04 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 75
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 4.0 ( 4 )      Behavior: 3.3 ( 4 )        OTA: 3.47

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle Pistol (2) (2)

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP:     SCM:     SPCM:    C C :      Retention Warning Counseling :

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, NAVY GOOD CONDUCT MEDAL (2), NATIONAL DEFENSE SERVICE MEDAL, GLOBAL WAR ON TERRORISM SERVICE MEDAL, SEA SERVICE DEPLOYMENT RIBBON (3), NATO MEDAL, NAVY RIFLE SHARPSHOOTER MEDAL , NAVY PISTOL MARKSMANSHIP RIBBON, LETTER OF COMMENDATION, ENLISTED AVIATION WARFARE SPECIALIST, ENLISTED SURFACE WARFARE SPECIALIST ”

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 :        


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

Applicant’s Issues

 1.        The Applicant contends it was an isolated incident in 86 months of service.
2.       The Applicant contends the senior member made up his mind prior to the start of his administrative separation board.

Decision

Date : 20 1 3 0606             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 no NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13) warnings and no misconduct resulting in nonjudicial punishment or court-martial. However, the Applicant tested positive on a urinalysis for cocaine (11,111 ng/ml, NAVDRUGLAB reported on 24 January 2012) , which is a violation of Uniform Code of Military Justice Article 112a (Wrongful use, possession, etc. of a controlled substance) . T he Applicant a pre-service drug waiver for using illicit drugs prior to entering the Navy. Based on the Article 112a violation, processing for administ rative separation is mandatory. The NDRB did not have the Applicant’s complete administrative separation package . However, the record shows the Applicant exercised rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request an administrative board. The administrative board voted 3-0 that the preponderance of the evidence supported that the Applicant had committed Misconduct (Drug Abuse) and recommend ed separation Under Other Than Honorable Conditions. His command and Separation Authority concurred with the recommendations, and the Applicant was discharged accordingly.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends it was an isolated incident in 86 months of service. The Applicant received an Honorable discharge for his first enlistment from November 2005 to March 2010. Each period of enlistment is an independent obligation and characterization is determined for that specific period of time. During his second enlistment, the Applicant tested positive for cocaine. Certain serious offenses , even though isolated, warrant separation from the service to maintain proper order and discipline. Violation of Article 112a is one such offense requiring mandatory processing for administrative separation regardless of grade , enlistments, performance, 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. The command did not pursue a punitive discharge but opted instead for the more lenient administrative discharge. Relief denied.
: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends the senior member made up his mind prior to the start of his administrative separation board. Specifically, the Applicant contends the senior member received and read the government’s evidence prior to the board. Further, the Applicant contends that the senior member stated he would be fair and partial , but he only needed five minutes to review the Applicant’s evidence , which was over 50 pages. The NDRB presumes regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant. The Applicant’s contention was brought forth prior to the Applicant’s discharge in hi s L etter of D eficiency to the Separati on Authority. In response, the government’s recorder (prosecutor) at the administrative board stated that the details of the senior member r eading the government’s evidence prior to the administrative board was disclosed to the defense counsel , and the defense counsel did not present a challenge for cause against the senior member until after the defense received an adverse finding. Th e recorder also specifically addressed the “five minutes” the Applicant contends was spent on deliberation and stated that the audio recording of the proceedings confirmed the administrative board convened for at least four hours. Other than the Applicant’s statement, he provided no evidence of impropriety and his statement alone is not enough to refute the presumption of regularity. The NDRB determined the Applicant’s discharge was proper and equitable. 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.

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 .


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 | 2014_Navy | ND1400647

    Original file (ND1400647.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After an administrative separation board recommended a General discharge, the Separation Authority concurred and ordered his separation with a General characterization of service for 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 at the NDRB within 15 years of the Applicant’s date of discharge. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201388

    Original file (ND1201388.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 receive G.I. 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. ” Additional...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1401549

    Original file (ND1401549.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. 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 HONORABLE and the narrative reason for separation shall remain REDUCTION IN FORCE. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700223

    Original file (ND0700223.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Recommendation on Separation: BY Recommendation on Characterization: BY Commanding Officer Recommendation (date): (20050815) Separation Authority (date): COMMANDER, MARITIME FORCE PROTECTION COMMAND (20050830)Reason for discharge directed: - Characterization directed: Date Applicant Discharged: 20050927 Types of Documents Submitted by Applicant and Considered By BoardRelated to Military Service: Service and/or Medical Record:Other Records: Related to Post-Service Period:...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1300071

    Original file (ND1300071.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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1500357

    Original file (ND1500357.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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

  • NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1400028

    Original file (ND1400028.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    There is no indication in the evidence of record or in the documentation submitted by the Applicant that the Applicant was recommended for or processed for a medical board by proper authority. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1500521

    Original file (ND1500521.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C),...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1200297

    Original file (ND1200297.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)20040618 - 20040725Active:20040726 - 20080723 Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20080724Age at Enlistment:Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20090806Highest Rank/Rate:IT3Length of Service:Year(s)Month(s) 14 Day(s)Education Level:AFQT: 53EvaluationMarks:Performance:4.0(1)Behavior:4.0(1)OTA: 3.71Awards and Decorations (per...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901083

    Original file (ND0901083.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...