Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00260
Original file (ND00-00260.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-AR, USNR
Docket No. ND00-00260

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 991216, 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 000810. 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. To Whom it may concern:

About four years ago I found myself in a precarious situation. I was conflicted over my obligation as an Airman and my duty as a son. During that time of these unfortunate incidents many factors in my life were coming to a hilt. If you will bear with me for a moment, I will explain to you the history of my involvement in the Navy. I will not delve deeply into my teenage years, but needless to say many people behave as fools when they can not see beyond their youth. Mistakes in youth can follow a person and so I chose a route that would save me from that regret. I chose the Navy, at the surprise and appreciation of my mother.

It goes without saying that old habits die hard especially when forces are moving against you. I will not try to turn a bowl of pits into cherries but perhaps I could have been a better Airman without all of the stressful distractions. I am not shying away from the fact that I wanted to be released, but my reasons were justified. There were family problems that were culminating and the stress was starting to wear on me. Matters wee not made better by my mother having a heart attack. The knowledge that the one person who supported me in everything and was most elated in my being a part of the Navy was suffering and I was not there.

I began to go through the proper channels to plea a release from the military, but all my requests were denied. Now, looking back, had my strong emotions and stress not been a factor I might have been able to think more clearly but I cannot change the past. I made the mistake to take it upon myself to leave and when I finally did return I admitted to an offense that I am able to honestly say I did not commit. My desperation drove me to fail safe way to an end.

At the time I did not think ahead, there was no future beyond the present and getting my wish. Well, be careful what you wish for because it has been four years since I was discharged and in the interim I have had time to rethink the situation. I do regret my impetuous behavior. My only recourse now is to appeal to this panel for an upgrade to an honorable discharge or at the very least a general discharge. I have grown to be a responsible individual with a steady job and frequent random drug tests. One of the more recent results I have enclosed for good measure.

Basically, I have improved my life and the only shadow that remains is a mistake I made when I was inexperienced and naive. I do this for the sake of my future because I have learned that history is not destiny. I would appreciate any help I can receive in this matter. Sincerely
2. Drug testing


 Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
Forsenic Drug Testing Custody and Control Form dated October 20, 1999
Copy of DD Form 214
Copy of Evaluation Report and Counseling Record for 96Jan16 to 96Jan22
Copy of Hobart High School Secondary School Record dated December 9, 1997
Character reference from State Senator, District 4, State of Indiana dated April 6, 2000
Certificate of training dated October 27, 1999
Certificate of training dated October 27, 1999
Certificate of training dated October 29, 1999
Certificate of training dated October 29, 1999
Certificate of training dated October 28, 1999
Certificate of training dated October 27, 1999
Certificate of training dated October 26, 1999

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: None
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     950215 - 950301  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 950302               Date of Discharge: 960315

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 01 00 14
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 20                          Years Contracted: 8

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 37

 Highest Rate: AA

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: NOB                           Behavior: NOB             OTA: NOB

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM

Days of Unauthorized Absence: 30

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 :

950923:  Applicant on unauthorized absence from USS DWIGHT D. EISENHOWER (CVN 69), located at Newport News, VA from 0600, 95SEP23 to 0600, 95SEP25 (2 days/surrendered).
960111:  Applicant on unauthorized absence from USS DWIGHT D. EISENHOWER (CVN 69) 0600, 95DEC16 until 0600, 96JAN10 (25 days/surrendered).
960116:  Applicant on unauthorized absence from USS DWIGHT D. EISENHOWER (CVN 69) 0800, 95JAN12 until 0900, 96JAN15 (3 days/surrendered).
960122:  Summary Court-Martial.
         Charge I: violation of the UCMJ, Article 86 (2 specs):
         Specification 1: Unauthorized absence from unit 0600, 16DEC95 to 0600, 10JAN96 (25 days/surrendered).
         Specification 2: Unauthorized absence from 0800, 12JAN96 until 0900, 15JAN96 (3 days/surrendered).
         Charge II: violation of the UCMJ, Article 112A:
         Specification:   Wrongful use of marijuana on 23DEC95 and 8JAN96.
         Finding: to Charge I and II and the specifications thereunder, guilty.
         Sentence: Forfeiture of $581.00, confinement for 30 days, reduction to AR.
         CA action 960126: Sentence approved and ordered executed.
960129:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under Other Than Honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to Commission of a serious offense as evidenced by all serious offense in your current enlistment and misconduct due to Drug abuse as evidenced by all drug incidents in your current enlistment.
960129:          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.
960201:  Commanding officer recommended discharge under Other Than Honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to Drug abuse (Use).

960215:  Applicant released from confinement and returned to full duty.

960304:  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 960315 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 states he had family problems (his mother’s health) and his request for release from military service was denied. There is no evidence that the applicant attempted to use his chain if command to resolve his personal problems. Additionally, the Board fails to see how the applicant’s use of marijuana had anything to do with his mother’s health. The applicant was court martialed for unauthorized absence (2 specifications) and use of illegal drugs (marijuana), then separated for use of illegal drugs. The discharge was proper and equitable. Relief denied.

The applicant states he admitted to an offense he did not commit. The applicant was convicted at court martial of unauthorized absence and drug abuse. Relevant and material facts stated in a court martial specification, shall be presumed, by the NDRB, as established facts. The discharge was proper and equitable. Relief denied.

The applicant claims he was young, inexperienced and naïve and has now improved his life. Youth, inexperience and being naive do not negate the applicant’s accountability for his actions. The applicant did not provide sufficient documentation to demonstrate he made a life change and is now a productive member of a community. The discharge was proper and equitable. Relief denied.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

 A . Navy Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 9/94, effective
22 Jul 94 until 02 Oct 96, 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 | 2000_Navy | ND00-00002

    Original file (ND00-00002.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 (D and E).In the applicant’s issue 1, the Board determined this issue is without merit. You should read Enclosure (5) of the Directive before submitting such a complaint. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00632

    Original file (ND03-00632.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. “To the Honorable Discharge Review Board; I request to have my discharge up-graded. The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of discharge.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00353

    Original file (ND02-00353.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).Issue 1: The Board found that the Applicant’s age, education level, and test scores qualified him for enlistment. In determining whether a case merits a change based on post-service conduct, the NDRB considers the length of time since discharge, the Applicant's record of community service, employment, conduct,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00579

    Original file (ND99-00579.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    940713: Returned onboard at 1500 (1 day - absence not excused, member charged 1 days of lost time). 960227: Surrendered at Portsmouth Naval Hospital at 2300, absence not excused, charged with 11 days lost time. 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.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00229

    Original file (ND01-00229.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The discharge shall remain: UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/Misconduct - Pattern of misconduct, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600 A personal appearance hearing discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 010420. After a thorough review of the testimony, records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper and equitable (C and D).The counsel for the applicant presented six issues for the Board’s...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00964

    Original file (ND01-00964.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Decision A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 020130. The Board found no evidence that the applicant had been unfairly denied separation for hardship or that his discharge characterization was inequitable. Evidence of continuing educational pursuits, an employment record, documentation of community service, certification of non-involvement with civil authorities and proof of his not using drugs, are examples of verifiable documents that should have been...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00168

    Original file (ND03-00168.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I made a mistake while in the U.S. Navy. 000204: Applicant returned to military authority at NACIC, at 1530, 000204.000210: Applicant returned to USS DWIGHT D EISENHOWER (CVN 69) at 1425, 000210 (161 days)000613: DD Form 214: Applicant discharged under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse (use), authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-146.Discharge package missing from service record. At this time, the applicant has not provided any documentation for the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00524

    Original file (ND04-00524.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The discharge shall remain: UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION As of this time, the Applicant has not provided any documentation for the Board to consider.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00005

    Original file (ND02-00005.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00005 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010926, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. The Board reviewed the applicant’s service record and, although the discharge package is missing, noted the applicant had at least three NJP’s in his enlistment in addition to drug abuse. Heis reminded that he remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00667

    Original file (ND99-00667.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The discharge shall change: UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL)/Misconduct – Drug abuse (Possession), authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630620. He had over 4 years previous honorable service that outweighs the offense. However, in light of the applicant’s post-service conduct, the Board considers the applicant’s discharge inequitable at this time(C and D).While the Board upgraded the applicant’s discharge, the Board disagreed with the applicant’s two issues.