Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1501134
Original file (ND1501134.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-SA, USN

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20150602
Characterization of Service Received:
Narrative Reason for Discharge:
Reenlistment Code:
Authority for Discharge: MILPERSMAN

Applicant’s Request: Characterization change to:
                  Narrative Reason change to:

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive:        USNR (DEP)       20040730 - 20040906     Active: 

Pre-Service Drug Waiver:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20040907    Age at Enlistment:
Period of Enlistment: Years Extension
Date of Discharge: 20051121     Highest Rank/Rate: SA
Length of Service: Year(s) Month(s) 15 Day(s)
Education Level:        AFQT: 42
Evaluation Marks:        Performance: 3.00 (1)    Behavior: 2.00 (1)      OTA: 3.00

Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):    

NJP:

SCM:

- 20051005:      Article 2 Specifications
         Specification 1: Without authority, absent himself from his unit to wit: Naval Support Activity located at Norfolk, Virginia and did remain so absent from 20050829 until 20050909.
         Specification 2: Without authority, absent himself from his unit to wit: Naval Support Activity located at Norfolk, Virginia and did remain so absent from 20050921 until 20050923.
         Article 112a (Wrongful use, possession, etc., of controlled substances) COCAINE
         Sentence: [Dates NFIR]

SPCM:    CC:      Retention Warning Counseling:

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

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

         “”
         “20050829 – 20050909, 20050921 - 20050923”

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:        

Types of Witnesses Who Testified


         Expert:           Character:      

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 is inequitable because he was not supported by his command and was treated unfairly.
2.       The Applicant contends his discharge is improper because he never used cocaine and his urinalysis result was the result of a legal substance.
3.       The Applicant contends his post-service record of no legal issues warrants consideration for an upgrade of his discharge.

Decision

Date: 20150820            Location: Washington D.C.        Representation: None

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 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 standards of equity and propriety. The Applicant’s record of service included for of the UCMJ: Article (Absence without leave; ), and Article 112a (Wrongful use, possession, etc., of controlled substance; cocaine). The Applicant a pre-service drug waiver prior to entering the Navy. Based on the Article 112a violation, processing for administrative separation is mandatory. When notified of administrative separation processing using the procedure, the Applicant rights to consult with a qualified counsel, submit a written statement, and request an administrative board.

: (Decisional) () . The Applicant contends his discharge is inequitable because he was not supported by his command and was treated unfairly. 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 that his discharge is inequitable. The Applicant’s statements alone do not overcome the government’s presumption of regularity in this case. Relief denied.

: (Decisional) () . The Applicant contends his discharge is improper because he never used cocaine and his urinalysis result was the result of a legal substance. The Applicant’s record shows that on 5 October 2005, at summary court-martial, the Applicant pleaded guilty to using cocaine in violation of UCMJ: Article 112a. The Applicant also waived all his rights during the administrative separation process, thus accepting the discharge recommendation of his command. The Applicant did not provide any evidence to the NDRB to support his contention. Therefore, the NDRB determined that the Applicant’s discharge was proper as issued. Relief denied.

: (Decisional) () . The Applicant contends his post-service record of no legal issues warrants consideration for an upgrade of his discharge. The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the re-characterization of a discharge. However, there is no law, or regulation, that provides that an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in civilian life subsequent to leaving the service. Normally, to permit relief, a procedural impropriety or inequity must have been found to exist during the period of enlistment in question. Besides the Applicant’s statement on the DD Form 293, he failed to provide any documentary evidence on his behalf for post-service consideration. The Applicant could have provided documentation as detailed in the Post-Service Conduct paragraph in the Addendum with the recognition 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. Without post-service documentary evidence, the Board determined the awarded characterization of service shall remain Under Other Than Honorable Conditions. 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 remain UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS and the narrative reason for separation shall remain MISCONDUCT (DRUG ABUSE).

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 , or http://www.secnav.navy.mil/mra/bcnr/Pages/default.aspx 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: Effective 6 February 2015, the NDRB is authorized to change a NDRB Applicant’s Reenlistment Code if related to an accompanying change in discharge characterization or narrative, but this authority is strictly limited to those cases where an applicant’s narrative reason or characterization of discharge is changed and that change warrants revision of the previously issued reenlistment code. 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 | 2006_Marine | MD0601050

    Original file (MD0601050.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ex-, USMC MD06-01050Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request: Application Received: 200060803Characterization of Service: Narrative Reason for Separation: Discharge Authority: MARCORSEPMAN 6210.5Last Duty Assignment/Command at Discharge: SACo, h&s bn, soi, campen, caApplicant’s Request: Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Review Requested: Representation: Decision: Date of Decision: 20070614Location of Board: Washington D.C.Complete Service Record: YESComplete Medical...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700038

    Original file (MD0700038.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Record of service. (2005001219) SJA review (date): (20060309)Separation Authority (date): COMMANDING GENERAL, 1 ST MARINE DIVISION (REIN) (20060313) Basis for discharge directed: due to: Characterization directed: Date Applicant Discharged: 20060317 Additional Documents Submitted by Applicant and Considered By BoardTotal Number of Pages: 5 Related to Period of Service Under Review: From Service and/or Medical Record: Other Records: Related to Other Period(s) of Service: From Service and/or...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700299

    Original file (MD0700299.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    20050620 Rights Elected at Notification: Consult with Counsel Obtain Copies of Documents Submit Statement(s) (date) Administrative Board Commanding Officer Recommendation (date): (20050601) SJA review (date): (20050912) Separation Authority (date): COMMANDING GENERAL, 1 ST MARINE DIVISION (20050920) Basis for discharge directed: DUE TO: Characterization directed: Date Applicant Discharged: 20050921 Types of Documents Submitted by Applicant and Considered By BoardRelated to Military Service:...

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1001601

    Original file (MD1001601.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    :(Nondecisional) The Applicant seeks a change in his RE-code in order to reenlist into the Armed Forces.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. 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2009_Marine | MD0901533

    Original file (MD0901533.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. Thorough review of the circumstances which led to the Applicant’s discharge and his discharge process revealed no issues of inequity or impropriety.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries and discharge process,...

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0601157

    Original file (MD0601157.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Service Record Entries Related to Characterization of Service or Narrative Reason for Separation 20010322:Applicant briefed on and certified understanding of Marine Corps policy concerning illegal use of drugs.20020826: NJP for violation(s) of UCMJ: Article 86: On or about 0730, 20020726 became absent from his appointed place of duty until on or about 1030, 20020819 (25 days). (20051011) SJA review (date): (20051020)Separation Authority (date): COMMANDING GENERAL, 2D MARINE DIVISION (REAR)...

  • USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801205

    Original file (MD0801205.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Types of Documents Submitted/reviewedRelated to Military Service: DD 214: Service and/or Medical Record: Other Records: Related to Post-Service Period: NONE DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. Record of service. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years from the date of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0701181

    Original file (ND0701181.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years from the date of discharge. Whenever a member is being processed through the Physical Evaluation Board, and subsequently is processed for an administrative involuntary separation for misconduct, the disability evaluation is suspended. With respect to a discharge adjudged by a court-martial, the action of the...

  • USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1501130

    Original file (MD1501130.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. Although the Applicant may feel he was going to be allowed to complete his enlistment in spite of his drug abuse, there is nothing in the record that shows his command had any other intentions than his mandatory processing for administrative separation. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901283

    Original file (ND0901283.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    For more information, the Applicant should read the paragraph in the Addendum titled Medical Conditions and Misconduct .Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, medical and 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...