Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301203

Original file (ND1301203.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-EMFA, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20130521

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)        20040227 - 20040505     Active:

Pre-Service Drug Waiver:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20040506     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20060731      Highest Rank/Rate: EM3
Length of Service : Y ear s M onth s 26 D a ys
Education Level:        AFQT: 82
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 3.0 ( 5 )      Behavior: 3.0 ( 5 )        OTA: 2.96

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP:
- 20060710 :      Article (Absence without leave , on or about 10 July 2006 )
         Art icle (Failure to obey order or regulation , failed to obey order by wrongfully staying out pas t prescribed liberty time )
         Awarded: Suspended:

- 20060714 :      Article 83 (Fraudulent enlistment, appointment, or separation ; fraudulently enlisted by deliberate concealment of the fact that he used mushrooms and E cstasy )
         Article (Wrongful use, possession, etc. of controlled substances, marijuana)
        Awarded: Suspended:

SCM:     SPCM:    C C :

Retention Warning Counseling :

- 20060710 :       For Article 86 (Absence without leave) and Art i c l e 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation)

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

The NDRB did note administrative error(s) on the original DD Form 214:

         “ 02 02 26 ”
“ MISCONDUCT (DRUG ABUSE) ”

The NDRB will recommend to the Commander, Navy Personnel Command, PERS- 312A, 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), 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 discharge f or violation of Article 112a was based on information he provided to a M edical O fficer in confidence as privileged information .
2.       The Applicant contends his post-service conduct warrants consideration for an upgrade.

Decision

Date : 20 1 4 0109             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. 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 NAVPERS 1070/613 (Page 13) warning and for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article ( Absence without leave) , Article ( Failure to obey order or regulation), Article 83 ( Fraudulent enlistment, appointment, or separation ), and Article ( Wrongful use, possession, etc., of controlled substances, marijuana ) . The A pplicant a pre-service drug waiver for using marijuana prior to entering the Navy. 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 General Court-Martial Convening Authority review.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his discharge for violation of Article 112a was based on information he provided to a Medical Officer in confidence as privileged information. The disclosure of the use of controlled substances is not covered by privilege when revealed to a Navy Medical Officer, who is required to report such use to a Sailor’s chain of command as it could have an effect on the unit’s ability to conduct its mission. Based upon his admission of pre-service and in-service use of controlled substances, his command found him guilty at NJP of violating UCMJ Articles 83 and 112a. 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, 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 Applicant’s discharge was proper and his characterization of service was equitable and consistent with the characterization of discharge given others in similar circumstances. Relief denied.

Issue 2: (Decisional) (Equity) RELIEF NOT WARRANTED. The Applicant contends his post-service conduct warrants consideration for an upgrade to Honorable. The NDRB considers 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. The Applicant provided a personal statement, proof of earning an Associate in Arts and Sciences, and a letter accepting him into a four-year university. T he 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 case by case basis to determine if post-service conduct establishes that the in-service misconduct was an aberration. T he Board determined the characterization of service received was appropriate considering the length of service and UCMJ violations. 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 | 2008_Marine | MD0801915

Original file (MD0801915.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant did not provided any documentation or evidence in support of his request and the Board determined that clemency would be inappropriate. The Board determined the characterization of service received, “ Bad Conduct Discharge”, was an appropriate characterization considering the length of service and the UCMJ violations involved, and based on the lack of post service documentation provided, clemency would be inappropriate.Should the Applicant obtain additional evidence or post...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900470

Original file (ND0900470.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Violation of Article 112a is one such offense requiring mandatory separation regardless of time in service, grade or record of service. The NDRB determined the awarded discharge characterization was appropriate and an upgrade would be inappropriate.After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found Pertinent Regulation/Law A. ” Additional Reviews :...
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0902383

Original file (MD0902383.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities. ” 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.
NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301055

Original file (ND1301055.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. Relief denied.Summary:...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801840

Original file (ND0801840.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: or Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USNR (DEP)20060710 - 20061120Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20061121Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20071116Highest Rank/Rate: SKSALength of Service: Years Months16 DaysEducation Level:AFQT: 51EvaluationMarks:Performance:4.0(1)Behavior:1.0(1)OTA: 2.83Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):Rifle Pistol...
USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1501011

Original file (MD1501011.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Based on the Article 112a violation, processing for administrative separation is mandatory. 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. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former...
NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201548

Original file (ND1201548.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.
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100885

Original file (ND1100885.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)20030819 - 20030902Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20030903Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20050215Highest Rank/Rate: GSMFALength of Service: YearMonths13 DaysEducation Level:AFQT: 73EvaluationMarks:Performance:NFIRBehavior:NFIROTA: NFIRAwards and Decorations (per DD 214):NDSM...
USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0900197

Original file (MD0900197.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: Substance Abuse: Criminal Records: Family/Personal Status: Community Service: References: Additional Statements:From Applicant:From Representation: From Congress member: Other Documentation: Pertinent Regulation/Law A. Paragraph 6210, MISCONDUCT of the Marine Corps Separation and...
USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1501022

Original file (MD1501022.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Based on the Article 112a violation, processing for administrative separation is mandatory. The Applicant could have provided documentation as detailed in the Post-Service Conduct paragraph in the Addendum , knowing 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 case basis to determine if post-service conduct establishes that the in-service misconduct was an aberration. ” Additional...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301203

Similar Decisions