Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1300613
Original file (ND1300613.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-HN, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20130115
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)        19990512 - 19990524     Active:   199905 25 - 20030416

Pre-Service Drug Waiver:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20030417     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20050513      Highest Rank/Rate: HM3
Length of Service : Y ear ( s ) M onth ( s ) 27 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 42
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 4.3 ( 4 )      Behavior: 2.6 ( 4 )        OTA: 3.74

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):     

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP:

- 20050223 :      Article (Wrongful use, possession, etc. of controlled substances)
         Awarded: Susp ended:

SCM:     SPCM:    C C :      Retention Warning Counseling :

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 his commanding officer told him he would receive a General ( Under Honorable Conditions ) discharge .
 2.       The Applicant contends his discharge was based on an isolated incident in almost 6 years of exemplary, committed service, and he warrant s an upgrade base d on his in-service conduct.
3 .       The Applicant contends members of his command who handled his discharge were later discharged for drug abuse, and he contends this affected the type of discharge he was given.
4 .       The Applicant contends the command Drug and Alcohol Program Advisor (DAPA) c hief violated his HIP A A rights , and his command refused to investigate .

Decision

Date : 20 1 3 0829             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. T he 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 for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article ( Wrongful use, possession, etc. of controlled substances , ). The Applicant a pre-service drug waiver 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 administrative separation package to determine whether or not the Applicant waived rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request an administrative board or a General Court-Martial Convening Authority review . However, per the Applicant ’ s DD Form 214, the Separation Code HKK indicates the Applicant waived his right to appear before an administrative board.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his commanding officer told him he would receive a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge. The commanding officer ’ s recommendation for separation is just that, a recommendation. The Applicant was notified of separation for Misconduct (Drug Abuse) and was notified that the least favorable characterization of service could be Under Other Than Honorable Conditions. While his CO may have recommended a General discharge, t he Separation Authority (first flag officer in the chain of command) makes the final determination as to whether the allegations in the notification of the basis for separation are substantiated by the eviden ce and the final characterization of service. The Under Other Than Honorable discharge was completely in line with what others received for similar misconduct. The NDRB determined the discharge was proper and equitable. Relief denied.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his discharge was based on an isolated incident in almost 6 years of exemplary, committed service, and he warrants an upgrade based on his in-service conduct. The Applicant received an Honorable discharge for his first enlistment from May 1999 to April 2003. Each period of enlistment is an independent obligation and characterization is determined for that specific period of time. During his second enlistment, he was found guilty of violating UCMJ Article 112a at NJP. 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 , performance, awards, previous enlistments, 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. The NDRB determined the discharge was proper and equitable. Relief denied.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends members of his command who handled his discharge were later discharged for drug abuse, and he contends this affected the type of discharge he was given. 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 contention the command treated him unfairly. Furthermore, the Applicant was found guilty of violating Article 112a at NJP, which requires mandatory processing for administrative separation and typically results in an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions characterization of service. The subsequent discharge of former fellow command members had nothing to do with the propriety or equity of the Applicant’s discharge. Relief denied.
: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends the command DAPA chief violated his HIPAA rights, and his command refused to investigate. 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 contention the command DAPA c hief violated his HI PA A right s or that his command acted improperly in discharging the Applicant . 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.


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 | ND1400566

    Original file (ND1400566.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends his command conspired against him to ensure he could not self-refer his substance abuse problem so they could punish and punitively discharge him.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,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000892

    Original file (ND1000892.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 entriesand 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1002035

    Original file (MD1002035.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. This issue does not serve to...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1500213

    Original file (ND1500213.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 remain UNDER OTHER THAN 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 application...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600645

    Original file (ND0600645.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests that the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable or general (under honorable conditions). At this time, the Applicant has not provided any documentation for the Board to consider an upgrade. The names, and votes of the members of the 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

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500936

    Original file (ND0500936.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). No indication of appeal in the record.030122: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with the least favorable characterization of service as general under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse and misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.030122: Applicant advised of rights and having...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600124

    Original file (ND0600124.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND06-00124 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20051025. The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. As of this time, the Applicant has not provided any post-service documentation for the Board to consider.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600638

    Original file (ND0600638.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). Documentation In addition to the service and medical records, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant’s DD Form 214 (Member 1 and 4) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: UnknownActive: None Period of Service Under Review...

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600248

    Original file (MD0600248.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    If I am successful I getting my discharge upgraded to honorable and my reinlistment code upgraded I would really consider going back into active duty.”Additional issues submitted by Applicant’s counsel/representative (Disabled American Veterans): “Dear Chairperson: After a review of the Former Service Members (FSM) DD Form 293 Application for the Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the Armed Forces of the United States and all of evidence assembled for review, we continue to note the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700282

    Original file (ND0700282.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USNR (DEP)19900209 - 19900411Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 19900412Years Contracted:Date of Discharge:19920221 Length of Service: 01Yrs 10Mths09 DysLost Time:Days UA: 1Education Level: Age at Enlistment:19AFQT: 41Highest Rank/Rate:FAEvaluation marks (# of occasions): Performance: 3.4 Behavior: 3.2 OTA: 3.6 (2)Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):SOUTHWEST ASIA SERVICE MEDAL, NATIONAL DEFENSE SERVICE MEDAL, SEA SERVICE...