Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00138
Original file (ND00-00138.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-AZAN, USN
Docket No. ND00-00138

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 991102, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to General/under Honorable conditions. 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 000727. 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.

The NDRB did note an administrative error on the original DD Form 214. Block 24, Character of Service should read: “Under Other Than Honorable Conditions” vice “Other Than Honorable.”. The original DD Form 214 should be corrected or reissued as appropriate.





PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

1. My discharge was inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident in 33 months of exemplary service with no other adverse action. In fact, my standards while serving in the U.S. Navy were never less than the highest possible evaluation score of 4.0 for my entire enlistment.
My education and career opportunities are extremely important to me as depicted by my grade point average (3.72) the last three years at San Diego State University. I graduated in December of 1998 with a Bachelor of Arts in Psychology as shown by my degree. I ask for a discharge upgrade because I do not want my professional career aspirations of becoming a school psychologist to be impeded or nullified due to one blemish on an otherwise impeccable record of active military duty. Any background checks with my current discharge listed may disqualify me for that job opportunity thereby halting the great progress I have made in my career path. Thank you for your attention to this matter.

 Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
Copy of degree of Bachelor of Arts in Liberal Arts and Sciences Psychology dated December 28, 1998
Copy of transcript from San Diego University
List of character references

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: None
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     900427 - 900822  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 900823               Date of Discharge: 930602

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 02 09 10
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 21                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 13 1/2           AFQT: 80

 Highest Rate: AZ2

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 4.00 (4)    Behavior: 4.00 (4)                OTA: 4.00

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM, SASM with 3 Bronze Stars, KLM, NUC, SSDR, Letter of Commendation

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

 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 :

900127:  Applicant briefed on Navy's policy on drug and alcohol abuse.

930205:  NAVDRUGLAB, Norfolk, VA reports urine sample received 930121 tested positive for THC.
930324:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under Other Than Honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to Drug abuse as evidenced by your positive urinalysis test results on 5 February 1993.
930324:          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 and to make a statement. Applicant objected to separation.
930406:  Medical evaluation for drug abuse found the applicant not to be drug or alcohol dependent.
930406:  Commanding officer recommended discharge under Other Than Honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to Drug abuse (Use). Commanding officer’s comments (verbatim): We have no place in the Navy for personnel who use drugs. Since testing positive, Petty Officer (applicant) has vehemently denied ever using drugs while in the Navy. His outstanding performance while at Fighter Squadron 102, at first inclined me to recommend a characterization of discharge as General Under Honorable Conditions, however, the unwavering confidence I have in our urinalysis program and the results of the dependency evaluation indicated that he did in fact use marijuana and should be separated with an Other Than Honorable discharge.

930511:  Applicant waived his right to make a statement.

930518:  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 930602 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, the Board determined this issue is without merit. The applicant claims his drug abuse was an isolated incident, his evaluation scores were no less than 4.0 and he graduated from college and doesn’t want his career aspirations to be impeded or nullified due to one blemish on an otherwise impeccable record. While the applicant’s record, prior to his drug abuse was 4.0, drug abuse requires mandatory processing for separation. Although he has attended college, his continued education alone is insufficient to warrant an upgrade to his discharge. The applicant’s discharge was proper and equitable. Relief denied.

The following is provided for the benefit of the applicant. 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, subsequent to leaving military service. The NDRB reviews the propriety (did the Navy follow its own rules in processing the applicant for discharge) and equity (did the applicant receive a discharge characterization in keeping with Navy guidance or was the characterization typical of other service members being separated for the same reason) of each applicant’s discharge to determine if proper procedures were followed. This applicant’s discharge was proper and equitable. Additionally, the NDRB is authorized to award clemency for post-service factors (what has the applicant done since discharge to become a contributing member of his/her community and to society in general). Those factors include but are not limited to the following: Evidence of continuing educational pursuits (transcripts, diploma, degree or vocational-technical certificates), a verifiable employment history (letter of recommendation from employer), documentation of community service (letter from activity/community group), certificate of non-involvement with civil authorities (police records check) and proof of not using drugs (detoxification certificate). The applicant provided minimal documentation to demonstrate good character and conduct. The applicant is encouraged to continue to establish a reputation of good character and document his accomplishments. Documentation to support any claim of good character is a must to receive any consideration based on post-service achievements. The applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, to discuss his post-service accomplishments, provided an application is received by the NDRB within fifteen years from the date of his discharge. Legal representation at the hearing is advisable.

 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 view DoD Directive 1332.28 and other Decisional Documents by going online at " afls14.jag.af.mil ".

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      


Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-01215

    Original file (ND99-01215.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a review of the Former Service Members (FSM) DD Form 293 Application for the Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the Armed Forces of the United States and all of the evidence assembled for review, we find the FSM is seeking to upgrade his discharge to Honorable.The FSM underwent a Special Court-Martial and was found guilty for the use of controlled substances. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00717

    Original file (ND00-00717.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Recorder at the Admin Board advised members of the Board they could not find the member possessed exceptional potential because evidence does not show he is a 4.0 Sailor. Relief is denied.The applicant’s second issue states: “I wasn’t completely aware of my legal rights.” The NDRB found that the applicant was afforded his rights according to regulations and was, in fact, represented by qualified counsel. The Recorder at the Admin Board advised members of the Board they could not find...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00522

    Original file (ND01-00522.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. 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 Board found that the applicant’s performance evaluation averages and service record were indeed outstanding, until the time that he began using illegal drugs. However, the NDRB is authorized to consider outstanding post-service...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00156

    Original file (ND04-00156.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    960703: 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 the misconduct warranted separation, and recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged on 19970103 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to drug abuse (A). The Applicant’s...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00828

    Original file (ND03-00828.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions. My discharge for misconduct was the first and only infraction during my time of service. 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 Applicant states his discharge was based on one isolated incident.

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00668

    Original file (ND99-00668.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 930324 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).In response to the applicant’s issue, the Board found the applicant’s statement “So I filed for my release” a...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00767

    Original file (ND02-00767.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00767 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 20020509, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable and the reenlistment code be changed to Re-1. Decision A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20030812. You may view DoD Directive 1332.28 and other Decisional Documents by going online at " afls14.jag.af.mil ".The names, and votes of the members of the Board are recorded on the original...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00224

    Original file (ND00-00224.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Decision A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 000803. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Employment Letter of Recommendation Copies of Enlistment Performance Evaluation Reports (5) Copy of Enlistment Performance Record (2) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: USN 861110 - 930531 HON USN 930601 -...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00125

    Original file (ND04-00125.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, reflects her willful failure to meet the requirements of his contract with the U.S. Navy and falls far short of that required for an upgrade of her characterization of service. Navy Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 5/93, effective 05...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01282

    Original file (ND03-01282.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENTex-ET1, USNDocket No. One who made a mistake on his time (leave) & has paid for it for over 6 ½ years now- PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged on 19961127 with a general (under honorable conditions) for misconduct due to drug abuse (A).