Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301337
Original file (ND1301337.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-MA2, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20130529
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)        19940713 - 19941115     Active:   19941116 - 19981016 HON
                                    19981017 - 20011114 HON
                                    20011115 - 20050316 HON
         
Pre-Service Drug Waiver:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20050317     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years 18 MONTHS Extension
Date of Discharge: 20120814      Highest Rank/Rate: MA1
Length of Service : Y ear ( s ) M onth ( s ) 00 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 86
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 4.5 ( 6 )      Behavior: 4.5 ( 6 )        OTA: 4.45

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle Pistol JSCM (2) NMCAM (2) (2) (5) ACM (2) MOVSM (2) (3) ESWS

Periods of UA /C ONF :

NJP:

- 20110328 :      Article (Wrongful use, possession, etc. of controlled substances , METHANDIENONE)
         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 :        




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

Applicant’s Issues

 1.        The Applicant contends his discharge was based on an isolated incident in 17.8 years of service with no other adverse action .
2.       The Applicant contends his administrative separation board was conducted unfairly, unprofessionally, and without regard for allowing the possibility of rehabilitation .
3.       The Applicant contends his administrative separation board considered hearsay evidence and charges that he was not charged for at nonjudicial punishment .
4.       The Applicant contends others were punished less severely for similar misconduct .

Decision

Date : 20 1 4 01 16             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 . 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 in his current enlistment included for o f the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article ( Wrongful use, possession, etc. of controlled substances, methandienon e , ) . 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 and request an administrative board . The Applicant’s administrative separation board found by a vote of 3-0 that the majority of the evidence supported the allegations presented, 3-0 for separation from the service, and 2-1 for an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions characterization of service. The Separation Authority agreed that misconduct warranted discharge but determined that, based on his record of service and meritorious achievements, the Applicant warranted a General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization of service.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his discharge was based on an isolated incident in 17.8 years of service with no other adverse action . The Applicant received Honorable discharges for his first three enlistments from November 1994 to March 2005. Each period of enlistment is an independent obligation and characterization is determined for that specific period of time. During his fourth enlistment, he was found guilty at NJP of violating UCMJ Article 112a. Despite a servicemember’s prior record of service, certain serious offenses, even though isolated, 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 characterization of the Applicant’s discharge was equitable and consistent with the characterization of discharge given others in similar circumstances. Relief denied.
Issues 2-3: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his ad ministrative separation board was conducted unfairly, unprofessionally, and without regard for allowing the possibility of rehabilitation . The Applicant also contends his administrative separation board considered hearsay evidence and charges that he was not charged for at nonjudicial punishment . The issues raised by the Applicant concerning his administrative separation board mirror the Letter of Deficiency submitted by the Applicant’s counsel to the Separation Authority. The Separation Authority and his Judge Advocate General reviewed the administrative separation board proceedings and fully considered the arguments

presented in the Letter of Deficiency. After such deliberation, the Separation Authority determined evidence of misconduct existed, separation was warranted, and the discharge characterization should be General (Under Honorable Conditions) for Misconduct (Drug Abuse). After a complete review of the records and documentation submitted by the Applicant, the NDRB determined he received full due process and all applicable rights , his separation proceedings and administrative separation board were proper , and his discharge characterization was equitable. Relief denied.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends others were punished less severely for similar misconduct . The NDRB reviews the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge individually, on a case-by-case basis. If such a review reveals an impropriety or inequity, relief is in order. Regulations permit relief on equitable grounds if the Applicant’s discharge is inconsistent with standards of discipline of the Naval Service. 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. In fact, violation of UCMJ Article 112a by someone with almost 18 years of service often results in a punitive discharge (i.e., Bad Conduct) as the result of a Special Court-Martial or an administrative Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge. A preponderance of the evidence reviewed supports the conclusion that the Applicant committed drug abuse, that separation from the Naval Service was appropriate, and that a General ( Under Honorable Conditions ) discharge was warranted. R elief 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 | 2013_Navy | ND1300725

    Original file (ND1300725.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends there was no evidence for either of his misconduct incidents. The Applicant has not presented any documentation to prove his commanding officer disregarded relevant information or failed to comply with applicable regulations during the NJP proceedings.After a complete review of the records and the Applicant’s detailed statement, the NDRB determined he was...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1300736

    Original file (ND1300736.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 | 2013_Navy | ND1301414

    Original file (ND1301414.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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301242

    Original file (ND1301242.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    of controlled substances, marijuana)[Extracted from Evaluation Report and Counseling Record dated 20090212]Article (False official statements) Awarded: Suspended: SCM:SPCM:CC:Retention Warning Counseling: 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0501379

    Original file (MD0501379.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD05-01379 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20050815. The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. My hope is that you, the Discharge Review Board, will consider a re-evaluation of the discharge I was given at the time of my administrative separation from the United States Marine Corps.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901007

    Original file (ND0901007.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Representation: By a vote of the Characterization shall .By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall DRUG REHABILITATION FAILURE.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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101951

    Original file (ND1101951.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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1300010

    Original file (ND1300010.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Based on the offenses committed by the Applicant, command administratively processed for separation. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301175

    Original file (ND1301175.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends he was found guilty on the basis of hearsay evidence that would not have held up in a court-martial. Based on the offense committed by the Applicant, command administratively processed for separation. A preponderance of the evidence reviewed supports the conclusion that the Applicant committed a serious offense, that separation from the Naval Service was...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901605

    Original file (ND0901605.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB determined the awarded characterization of service was warranted.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 :...