Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00233
Original file (ND00-00233.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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


ex-RM1, USN
Docket No. ND00-00233

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 991208, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. The applicant listed AMERICAN LEGION as his representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 000803. 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, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630620.









PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

 1. (EQUITY ISSUE) This former member avers that he was erroneously discharged because he never used any unlawful substances. On this basis, he opines that upgrade of his character of service to full honorable is warranted.

2. (EQUITY ISSUE) This former member further requests that the Board include provision of SECNAVINST 5420.174C., enclosure (1), Chapter 9, as it pertains to post-service conduct, in assessing the merits of her application.

Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
Letters to Honorable D_____ P_____ (2) (3pgs)
Adverse Performance Evaluation Statement (2 copies)
Special Request Authorization Chits (2 copies)
 Request for Mast from Commanding Officer, Naval Computer and Telecommunications Area Master Station LANT (2 copies).
Letter from applicant in regards to Denial of Trial by Courts Martial (2)
 Adverse Performance Evaluation Report
Evaluation Report & Counseling Record (3pgs) (2 copies)
Copies of DD Form 214 (3)
Copy of Resume (2)(2pgs)
Copy of Commander, Naval Base, Norfolk discharge authority.
 Congressional Request
 Letter to Honorable D____ P____ (2pgs)
 Letter from G____ D. M____, PC (2 copies)
 Special Request Authorization Chit (3)
Letter from applicant to Senator W____ M. L____
 Copy of Radioman Second Class Citation
 Copy of Radioman First Class Citation
Copy of Transcript from Technical Career Institute, Inc (2 pgs)
 Copies of Electronic Technician Certificates (2)

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: USN                        800912 - 841125  HON
                   USN                       841126 - 920123  HON
                   USN                       920124 - 960102  HON
          Inactive: USNR (DEP)     800214 - 800911  COG
Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 960103               Date of Discharge: 971022

 Length of Service (years, months, days):
         Active: 01 09 19
          Inactive: None
Age at Entry: 17                          Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 50
Highest Rate: RM1

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):
Performance: 3.00 (1)    Behavior: 1.00 (1)                OTA: 1.86

 Military Decorations: None
Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NMCOSR(2), MUCR (3), NDSM, NUCR, SASMwb*, KLM(SAUDI), NMCAM (2), NEM, CGSOS, NAVY"E"RIBBON

Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630620.
Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

970103:  Reenlisted at NAVCOMTELSTA DIEGO GARCIA for 4 years.
970402:  NAVDRUGLAB, JACKSONVILLE, FL, reported applicant's urine sample, received 970310, tested positive for [THC].
970604:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse as evidenced by NAVDRUGLAB JACKSONVILLE FL 021700Z APR 97.
970606:  Applicant advised of his rights and having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to appear before an Administrative Discharge Board.
970624:  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.

970924:  Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse (use).

971010:  Commander, Naval Base, Norfolk authorized 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 971022 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’s first issue states: “(EQUITY ISSUE) This former member avers that he was erroneously discharged because he never used any unlawful substances. On this basis, he opines that upgrade of his character of service to full honorable is warranted.”
 The NDRB found no administrative error in the applicant’s discharge. NAVDRUGLAB JACKSONVILLE FL 021700Z Apr 97 reported the applicant’s urine sample tested positive for THC. The applicant refused NJP and demanded trial by court martial. The applicant appeared before an Administrative Board that recommended separation for misconduct. The NDRB did not find any errors in the applicant’s discharge. Relief is denied.

 The applicant’s second issue states: “(EQUITY ISSUE) This former member further requests that the Board include provision of SECNAVINST 5420.174C., enclosure (1), Chapter 9, as it pertains to post-service conduct, in assessing the merits of his application. The following is provided for the applicant’s edification. The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. The applicant must be aware that there is no law or regulation which provides that an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time, or good conduct in the civilian life subsequent to leaving the service. Normally, to permit relief, an error or injustice must have been found to have existed during the period of enlistment in question. Outstanding post-service conduct, to the extent that such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review, may be considered by the NDRB. Relief is not warranted.

The applicant is reminded that he is eligible for a personal appearance hearing provided the application is received within 15 years from the date of discharge. Representation at personal appearance hearing is highly recommended.








Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)
A . Navy Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 14, effective
03 Oct 96 until 11 Dec 97, Article 3630620 SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT 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 | 2001_Navy | ND01-00848

    Original file (ND01-00848.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-AA, 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).The applicant’s issue states: “Please review the attached documents.” The Board considered the applicant’s documents. PART IV - INFORMATION FOR THE APPLICANT If you believe that the decision in your...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00983

    Original file (ND00-00983.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    urinalysis report indicates applicant tested negative [Applicant's copy].990323: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.990323: Applicant advised of his rights and having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to appear before an Administrative Discharge Board. The Board was convened, found misconduct, and recommended ATAN (Applicant) be separated with an Other Than...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00231

    Original file (ND00-00231.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. (EQUITY ISSUE) On the basis of the civil court dismissal of his marijuana and drug paraphernalia charges in exchange for a plea of guilty to disorderly conduct, this former member avers that his reason for discharge, misconduct due to wrongful possession of a controlled substance, and character of separation, General (Under Honorable Conditions), are inequitable and warrant upgrade.2. PART IV - INFORMATION FOR THE APPLICANT If...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-01069

    Original file (ND99-01069.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Resume (2pgs) Copy of DD Form 214 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: USN 840514 - 890814 HON Inactive: USNR (DEP) 840412 - 840514 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 890815 Date of Discharge: 910412 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 01 07 28 Inactive: None ...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00437

    Original file (ND01-00437.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00437 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010222, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions. The Board will not grant relief on the basis of this issue.The applicant’s representative submitted the following as issue 2: (Equity Issue) This former member further requests that the Board include provisions of SECNAVINST 5420.174C., enclosure (1), Chapter 9, as it pertains to...

  • USMC | DRB | 2000_Marine | MD00-00883

    Original file (MD00-00883.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Display Transcript (3pgs) Orientation Letter for Michigan State University College Schedule (2pgs) Letter from applicant PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: USMC None Inactive: USMCR(J) 951215 - 960707 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 960708 Date of Discharge: 980630 Length...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-01231

    Original file (ND99-01231.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    890307: Appeal of NJP denied.890309: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under Other Than Honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to Drug abuse evidenced by your service record and your urinalysis test on 880920.890321: Applicant advised of his rights and having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ, Article 27B, elected to appear before an Administrative Discharge Board. Additionally, the NDRB is under no obligation to conduct a second Admin...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00717

    Original file (ND99-00717.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION Issues (verbatim) The FSM was discharged from active Naval service on August 7, 1997, due to improper use of a controlled substance. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:DAV issues letter Copy of DD Form 214 Copy of previous DD Form 214 Letter from applicant (2pgs) Letter of reference from wife (2pgs) Letter of reference from mother Copy of Associate...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-01166

    Original file (ND99-01166.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND99-01166 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 990830, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. The NDRB found the applicant’s issue non decisional. 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. 20310-1809The names, and votes of the members of the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00619

    Original file (ND01-00619.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION 000316: Applicant refused nonjudicial punishment.000413: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.000413: Applicant advised of his rights and having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to appear before an Administrative Discharge Board.000727: An Administrative Discharge Board, based upon a preponderance of the evidence...