Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00414
Original file (ND99-00414.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-MMFA, USN
Docket No. ND99-00414

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 990127, 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 991206. 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 (Use), authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630620.


PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

 Prior to the documentary discharge review, the applicant introduced no issues as block 8 on the DD Form 293 is blank.

Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
Copy of DD Form 214 (Member 1 and 4)
Copy of DD Form 214 previous enlistment
Statement from applicant to Chief of Information dated April 1, 1991
Letter to Chief of Information dated January 9, 1999
Twenty-two pages from applicant's service record
Copy of applicant's resume

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: USN                        841114 - 881116  HON
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     840731 - 841113  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 881117               Date of Discharge: 900515

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 01 05 29
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 23                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 23/24

 Highest Rate: MM3

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.33 (3)    Behavior: 3.33 (3)                OTA: 3.33

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: MUC

Days of Unauthorized Absence: 23

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/Misconduct – Drug abuse (Use), authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630620.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

891106:  Applicant unauthorized absence 0700-0830, 6Nov89.

891118:  Applicant unauthorized absence 0700-1630, 18Nov89.

900123:  Applicant to unauthorized absence 0700, 23Jan90.

900205:  Applicant from unauthorized absence 1500, 5Feb90 (13 days/surrendered).

900226:  Summary Court-Martial.
         Charge I: violation of the UCMJ, Article 86.
         Specification 1: Unauthorized absence 30Dec89-3Jan90 (4 days/surrendered).
         Specification 2: Unauthorized absence 17-19Jan90 (2 days/surrendered).
         Specification 3: Unauthorized absence 22Jan-5Feb90.
         Finding: to Charge I and the specifications thereunder, guilty.
         Sentence: Confinement for 30 days, reduction to MMFN.
        
900301:  Applicant unauthorized absence 0630-1015, 1Mar90.

900302:  Applicant to unauthorized absence 0630, 2Mar90.

900306:  Applicant from unauthorized absence 1300, 6Mar90 (4 days/surrendered).

900312:  Applicant unauthorized absence 0630-1230, 12Mar90.

900329:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence 0630-0800, 26Mar90, violation of UCMJ Article 92: Fail to obey a order by not staying in rack while SIQ, violation of UCMJ Article 112A: Wrongful use of cocaine during the period 7Feb-6Mar90.
         Award: Forfeiture of $362 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to MMFA. No indication of appeal in the record.
900409:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense and misconduct due to drug abuse as evidenced by your enlisted service record.
900409:          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.
900416:  Medical evaluation for drug abuse found the applicant to be a experimental user, not drug dependent.

900418:  Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse (use). Commanding officer’s comments (verbatim): MMFA (applicant) reported aboard this command 5 December 1998. At that time, he was a Machinist's Mate Third Class on his second enlistment. After one year on board, MMFA (applicant) became an unauthorized absence problem. On 26 February 1990, he appeared at Summary Court-Martial for three unauthorized absence offenses. He was confined for 30 days and reduced to E-3. On 29 March 1990 he appeared at Captain's Mast for violation of a Medical Department SIQ order and for wrongful use of cocaine. As a result, he was reduced to his present paygrade.
         MMFA (applicant's) downhill performance has rendered him totally unacceptable as a member of my command. This trend of unauthorized absence and drug use makes MMFA (applicant) unsuitable for further naval service, and has earned him my strongest recommendation for immediate separation under other than honorable conditions.

900430:  CNMPC directed the applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse (use).

900523:  Judge Advocate Review of 900226 Summary Court-Martial completed.
         Charge I: violation of the UCMJ, Article 86.
         Specification 1: Unauthorized absence 30Dec89-3Jan90
         Specification 2: Unauthorized absence 17-19Jan90
         Specification 3: Unauthorized absence 22Jan-5Feb90.
         Finding: to Charge I and the specifications thereunder, guilty.
         Sentence: Confinement for 30 days, reduction to MMFN.
         Sentence approved and ordered executed.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 900515 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).

The applicant introduced no decisional issues for consideration by the Board.

 Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

 A. Navy Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560A), Change 6, effective 11 Jan 89 until 13 Jun 90, 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, DC 20374-5023       


Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00449

    Original file (ND03-00449.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged on 20020424 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to drug abuse (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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00406

    Original file (ND00-00406.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    880625: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86 (3 Specs): UA from unit; violation of UCMJ Article 92: disobeyed a lawful written order.Award: Forfeiture of $100 per month for 2 months (suspended for 6 months), restriction and extra duty for 30 days. MMFR (Applicant)'s defense counsel states in his appeal letter that the senior member was not a line officer; that with the other ships alongside in Bahrain as well as the USS LASALLE, an 0-4 line officer could have been obtained. After a...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01319

    Original file (ND03-01319.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. In the acknowledgement letter, the Applicant was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing, and also advised that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) does not travel. Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events : 001030: UA from USS SHREVEPORT (LPD-12) 0630,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00074

    Original file (ND00-00074.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 response to 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. At this time, the applicant has not provided any documentation of good character and...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00305

    Original file (ND01-00305.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    No indication of appeal in the record.990917: Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (Unauthorized absence, failing to go to appointed place of duty and breaking restriction which was subsequently violated when he was awarded punishment at CO's NJP on 28Oct99 for failing to go to appointed place of duty. There is nothing in the applicant’s service record or application that shows the applicant was not responsible for his documented misconduct while on active duty. The names, and votes of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00476

    Original file (ND02-00476.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Appointment of Veterans Service Organization as Claimant's representative dated March 9, 2001 Applicant's DD Form 214 Sixteen pages from Applicant's service/medical record PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 890523 - 890525 COG Active: None Period of Service Under Review :Date of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00655

    Original file (ND02-00655.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. 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).Issue 1: The Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of obtaining VA educational benefits. Evidence of continuing educational pursuits, a positive employment record, documentation of community service, certification of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00752

    Original file (ND03-00752.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-00752 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030328. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. 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 720 Kennon Street SE Rm 309 Washington Navy Yard DC 20374-5023

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00189

    Original file (ND02-00189.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-DCFN, USN Docket No. 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).Issues 1 and 3: The Applicant states his discharge was inequitable because it was based on an isolated incident. Drug abuse warranted processing for separation, normally under other than honorable...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00130

    Original file (ND03-00130.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In the acknowledgement letter, the Applicant was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) does not travel; all hearings are held in the Washington DC area. Age at Entry: 22 Years Contracted: 8 Education Level: 12 AFQT: 34 Highest Rate: BTFA Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks): Performance: 2.40 (2) Behavior: 2.40 (2) OTA: 2.40 Military Decorations: None Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: None Days of Unauthorized Absence: 9 Character, Narrative Reason,...