Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00071
Original file (ND99-00071.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-RMSA, USN
Docket No. ND99-00071

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 981014, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. The applicant did not list any representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 990927. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, NDRB discerned no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the applicant’s service. The Board’s vote was unanimous that the character of the discharge shall not change. The discharge shall remain: UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/MISCONDUCT – Drug Abuse, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630620.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues (verbatim)

 1. I wish to have my general discharge upgraded to an honorable.

2. I wish for my home-loan & other benefits to be re-instated.

 Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
None

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: None
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     900213 - 900724  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 900725               Date of Discharge: 930624

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 02 11 00
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 19                          Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 45

 Highest Rate: RMSN

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.73 (3)    Behavior: 3.30 (4)                OTA: 3.46

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM, Battle “E”

Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

 Character, Narrative Reason, and Authority of Discharge (at time of issuance):

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/MISCONDUCT – Drug Abuse, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630620.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

930527:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 112a: Wrongful use of amphetamine/methamphetamine.
         Award: Forfeiture of $407.00 pay per month for 2 months (Forfeiture for 1 months suspended for 3 months), restriction and extra duty for 45 days and reduction to RMSN. No indication of appeal in the record.

930603:  Medical officer evaluation for drug abuse found the applicant to be a drug abuser, not drug dependent and recommended separation from the service without a provision of VA rehabilitation treatment.

930604:  DAAR note the applicant tested positive for amphetamines/ methamphetamines during unit sweep and not dependent or eligible for rehabilitation.

930528:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse as evidenced by the applicant’s drug abuse.
930529:          Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights except the right to obtain copies of the documents used to support the basis for the separation.
930608:  Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse (use). Commanding officer’s comments (verbatim): In May 93 as a result of a command unit sweep, RMSA (applicant's) urine sample tested positive for amphetamine/methamphetamine. Although an above average performer, his drug use is incompatible with Naval service. He has no potential for further Naval service and I recommend that he be separated with an other than honorable discharge.

930616:  BUPERS directed the applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse (use).

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 930624 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to drug abuse (use) (A). The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (B). After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper and equitable (C and D).

In the applicant’s issue 1, there is no law or regulation that provides for the upgrade of an unfavorable discharge based solely on the passage of time, or good conduct in the civilian life subsequent to leaving the Service. However, the Board is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge (D). Those factors include, but are not limited to, the following: evidence of continuing educational pursuits (transcripts, diplomas, degrees, vocational-technical certificates), a verifiable employment record (Letter of Recommendation from boss), documentation of community service (letter from the activity/community group), certification of non-involvement with civil authorities (police records check) and proof of his not using drugs (detoxification certificate, AA meeting attendance or letter documenting participation in the program) in order for consideration for clemency based on post-service conduct. At this time, the applicant has not provided any documentation of good character and conduct. Therefore no relief will be granted. The applicant is encouraged to continue with his pursuits and is reminded that he is eligible for a personal appearance hearing provided the application is received within 15-years from the date of discharge.

In response to the applicant’s issue 2 of obtaining a “home loan and other benefits.” The Board has no obligation to change the applicant’s discharge in order to allow him to obtain veteran’s benefits. The Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) is a separate agency that makes its own determinations on VA eligibility. There is no requirement or law that grants recharacterization based solely on the issue of obtaining veteran’s benefits. The Board encourages the applicant to contact his nearest DVA Regional Office for further information regarding his VA eligibility. This is not an issue for which the Board will grant relief.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

 A . Navy Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 5/93, effective
05 Mar 93 until 21 Jul 94, Article 3630620, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED MEMBERS BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT DUE TO DRUG ABUSE .

B. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (Manual for Discharge Review, 1984), enclosure (1), Chapter 2, AUTHORITY/POLICY FOR DEPARTMENTAL DISCHARGE REVIEW.

C. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (Manual for Discharge Review, 1984), enclosure (1), Chapter 9, paragraph 9.2, PROPRIETY OF THE DISCHARGE.

D. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (Manual for Discharge Review, 1984), enclosure (1), Chapter 9, paragraph 9.3, EQUITY OF THE DISCHARGE.

PART IV - INFORMATION FOR THE APPLICANT
If you believe that 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 Directive 1332.28, you may submit a complaint in accordance with Enclosure (5) of that Directive. You should read Enclosure (5) of the Directive 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 obtain a copy of DoD Directive 1332.28 by writing to:
                  DA Military Review Boards Agency
                  Management Information and Support Directorate
                  Armed Forces Reading Room
                  Washington, D.C. 20310-1809

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:

                  Naval Council of Personnel Boards
                  Attn: Naval Discharge Review Board
                  Washington Navy Yard
                  720 Kennon Street SE Rm 309
                  Washington, D.C. 20374-5023     

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00979

    Original file (ND99-00979.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Now at this time almost six years since my discharge I am respectfully requesting that my discharge be now upgraded to a full honorable discharge. The applicant’s service was marred by the applicant’s positive urinalysis on two separate occasions. Navy Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 5/93, effective 05 Mar 93 until 21 Jul 94, Article 3630620, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED MEMBERS BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT DUE TO DRUG ABUSE.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-01080

    Original file (ND00-01080.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    At this time, the applicant has not provided any documentation of good character and conduct. Navy Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), effective 15 Aug 91 until 04 Mar 93, Article 3630620, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED MEMBERS BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT DUE TO DRUG ABUSE.B. PART IV - INFORMATION FOR THE APPLICANT If you believe that 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-01038

    Original file (ND00-01038.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper and equitable (C and D).The applicant’s issue states: “I believe my discharge was inequitable because this was my only offense and I was a good member of the service.” The record shows the applicant was found guilty of use of a controlled substance. Navy Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 5/93, effective 05 Mar 93 until 21...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00584

    Original file (ND03-00584.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the Applicant’s service was discovered by the NDRB. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-01025

    Original file (ND99-01025.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 931101 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to drug abuse (use) (A). After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper and equitable (C and D).The applicant introduced no decisional issues for consideration by the Board. Navy Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-01081

    Original file (ND00-01081.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper and equitable (C and D).In the applicant’s issue 1, the Board found that the applicant had a positive urinalysis for THC on 2 separate occasions, which he knew to be in violation of the UCMJ. Although the applicant may feel he is a “good person” and “worthy of an upgrade,” his actions while in the service make him deserving of an other...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00304

    Original file (ND01-00304.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :840716: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 134: Wrongful use of a controlled substance, to wit: marijuana on 12Jun84. After a thorough review of the records, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper and equitable (C and D).In response to the applicant’s issue, the applicant states she is deserving of an upgrade to her discharge because of her hard work both while in the Navy and as a...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00173

    Original file (ND04-00173.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Decision A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20040720. No indication of appeal in the record.880914: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and misconduct due to drug abuse.880914: Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights.880927: Medical evaluation for...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00857

    Original file (ND00-00857.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:None PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: USN 831227 - 870219 HON Inactive: USNR (DEP) 830218 - 831226 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 870220 Date of Discharge: 920511 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 05 02 22 Inactive: None I have been an upstanding member of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00165

    Original file (ND01-00165.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, NDRB discerned no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the applicant’s service. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Letter from applicant's parents, dated November 14, 2000 Copy of DD Form 214 Letter from applicant's parents, dated January 9, 2001 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE...