Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301533
Original file (ND1301533.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-ET2, USN
Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request
Application Received: 20130717
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)        19970125 - 19971117     Active:  

Pre-Service Drug Waiver:

Period of Service Under Review:
 Date of Current Enlistment: 19971118     Age at Enlistment:
Period of E nlistment : Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20020621      Highest Rank/Rate: ET2
Length of Service : Y ear ( s ) M onth ( s ) 04 D a y ( s )
Education Level:        AFQT: 84
Evaluation M arks:         Performance: 3.6 ( 5 )      Behavior: 3.2 ( 5 )        OTA: 3.26

Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214):      Rifle Pistol

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:
         
         “ JKK ”
 “ MISCONDUCT ”
         
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:                  Other Documentation:    
                  Additional Statements:
         From Applicant:           From/To Representation:           From/To Congress member:        


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

Applicant’s Issues

 1.       The Applicant contends he never failed a urinalysis, was never punished for using drugs, was not given due process, and was not given a chance to overcome his isolated mistake in an otherwise honorable 4 ½ years of service.
2.       The Applicant contends his misconduct is mitigated by personal problems.
3.       The Applicant contends his discharge was inequitable and harsh.
4.       The Applicant contends his post - service accomplishments warrant consideration for an upgrade.
Decision

Date: 20 1 4 0220             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 standards of equity and propriety. The Applicant’s record of service included no adjudicated misconduct. However, b ased on a positive urinalysis for MDMA and MDA (Ecstasy) and the Applicant’s admission to illegal drug use, the Applicant’s command processed him for administrative separation. P rocessing for administ rative separation is mandatory for violations of the Navy’s zero-tolerance drug policy . When notified of administrative separation processing using the procedure, the Applicant rights to consult with a qualified coun sel and submit a written statement .

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends he never failed a urinalysis, was never punished for using drugs, was not given due process, and was not given a chance to overcome his isolated mistake in an otherwise honorable 4 ½ years of service. According to the Applicant’s service records, he tested positive for MDMA and MDA as a result of a urinalysis conducted on 20 April 2002. The Applicant subsequently admitted to the use of an illegal drug. Violation of the Navy’s zero-tolerance policy requires mandatory separation regardless of grade, performance, or time in service. Adjudicated misconduct such as nonjudicial punishment (Captain’s Mast) or a court-martial is not required before discharging a servicemember for drug abuse. On 24 May 2002, the Applicant’s command notified him, in writing, that he was being processed for administrative separation for Misconduct (Drug Abuse) and that the least favorable characterization of service could be General (Under Honorable Conditions). The Applicant acknowledged the notification, in writing, and elected his rights to consult with a qualified counsel and to submit a written statement to the Separation Authority. He did not warrant the right to appear before an administrative separation board, because he had less than 6 years of service and was not recommended for an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge. The Applicant was not afforded drug rehabilitation treatment, because he was deemed to be not drug dependent. Finally, he was not given the chance to overcome his isolated mistake, because violation of the zero-tolerance drug policy requires mandatory separation. After a thorough review of the Applicant’s statement and records, the NDRB determined he was afforded full due process, was properly notified of separation processing for Misconduct (Drug Abuse), and was properly and equitabl y discharged. Relief denied.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his misconduct is mitigated by personal problems. The NDRB recognizes that serving in the military is challenging. Most service members, however, serve honorably and therefore earn their Honorable discharges. In fairness to those service members, commanders and separation authorities are tasked to ensure that undeserving Sailors receive no higher characterization than is due. There is no evidence in the record, nor did the Applicant provide any documentation, to indicate he attempted to use the numerous services available for service members who undergo personal problems during their enlistment s , such as the Navy Chaplain, Medical or Mental Health professionals, Navy Relief Society, Family Advocacy Programs, or even the Red Cross. The NDRB determined the Applicant’s personal problems were not mitigating factors in his misconduct. Relief denied.
: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his discharge was inequitable and harsh. 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. A preponderance of the evidence reviewed supports the conclusion that the Applicant committed misconduct (drug abuse) and that separation from the Nav y was appropriate. Misconduct (drug abuse), particularly from an E-5, typically results in an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions characterization, however, the NDRB determined his command likely took the quality of his service into consideration when recommending a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge. Relief denied.

: (Decisional) ( ) . The Applicant contends his post - service accomplishments warrant consideration for an upgrade. 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, a letter of recommendation from his current employer, and copies of his own service record. 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 case by case basis to determine if post-service conduct establishes that the in-service misconduct was an aberration. The Board determined t he characterization of service received was appropriate considering the length of service and violation of the Navy’s drug policy . 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 33, effective 16 July 2001 until 21 August 2002, 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 | 2006_Navy | ND0600049

    Original file (ND0600049.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. ), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.000329: An Administrative Discharge Board, based upon a preponderance of the evidence and by unanimous vote, found that the Applicant had committed misconduct due to drug abuse that such misconduct warranted separation, and...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500669

    Original file (ND0500669.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The record clearly shows that the Applicant willfully and negligently abused (used) illegal drugs, as documented by the positive results from the Naval Drug Laboratory in San Diego, CA on 20 020605 and by the subsequent nonjudicial punishment (NJP) proceedings on 20 020611 for violation of UCMJ Article 112a Wrongful use of controlled substance. As of this time, the Applicant...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501513

    Original file (ND0501513.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). Thank you for your consideration and review.” Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Only the service and medical records were reviewed. As of this time, the Applicant has not provided any post-service documentation for the Board to consider.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301092

    Original file (ND1301092.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of ServicePrior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)20030513 - 20040127Active:Pre-Service Drug Waiver: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20040128Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20070918Highest Rank/Rate: AZ3Length of Service: Year(s)Month(s)22 Day(s)Education Level:AFQT: 64EvaluationMarks:Performance:4.0(4)Behavior:3.51(4)OTA: 3.91Awards and...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1401529

    Original file (ND1401529.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. There is no requirement or law that grants recharacterization solely on the issue of obtaining veterans benefits and this issue does not serve to...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001749

    Original file (ND1001749.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 | 2012_Navy | ND1201951

    Original file (ND1201951.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant contends his divorce led to his misconduct.2. ” 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. There is no requirement or law that grants recharacterization solely on the issue of...

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1101677

    Original file (MD1101677.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant contends he was not counseled appropriately by his command and his counsel concerning his separation.After an exhaustive review of the Applicant’s service record and submitted documents, the NDRB determined the Applicant’s discharge was proper. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301609

    Original file (ND1301609.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of ServicePrior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)19920601 - 19920825Active:19920826 - 1997030219970303 - 2001100220011003 - 20080413Pre-Service Drug Waiver: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20080414Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20120426Highest Rank/Rate: ET2Length of Service: Year(s)Month(s)13 Day(s)Education Level:AFQT:...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1401181

    Original file (ND1401181.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ” 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. A request for a waiver can be submitted during the processing of a formal application for reenlistment through a recruiter.