Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00311
Original file (ND00-00311.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-HR, USN
Docket No. ND00-00311

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 000110 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

 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
Copy of Associate of Arts Degree
Letter of Request from applicant

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: USN                        None
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     910319 - 910721  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 910722               Date of Discharge: 950706

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 03 11 15
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 19                          Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 51

 Highest Rate: HN

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.75 (4)    Behavior: 3.85 (4)                OTA: 3 .95

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM

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 :

940707:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: UA from appointed place of duty to wit: Branch Medical Clinic, Naval Station, San Diego, CA from 1545, 940330 to 1710, 940330 and from 0700, 940420 to 0900, 940420, violation of UCMJ Article 92: Dereliction of duty to wit: Leaving his post at Branch Medical Clinic, Naval Station, San Diego, CA on or about 940324 and going to sleep. On or about 940331, sleeping on watch. On or about 940628 failed to perform the required check of on the metro ambulance.
         Award: Forfeiture of $400.00 per month for 2 months (suspended for 6 months), restriction and extra duty for 30 days, reduction to next inferior pay grade (suspended for 6 months). No indication of appeal in the record.

941012:  NAVDRUGLAB, SAN DIEGO, CA urinalysis report received on 941024 tested positive for methamphetamine

941021:  Applicant placed on Drug Screening Surveillance Program for a minimum period of six months.

941028:  NAVDRUGLAB, SAN DIEGO, CA urinalysis report received on 941024 tested positive for methamphetamine.

941107:  Previously suspended punishment awarded at CO's NJP on 940707 is hereby vacated due to continued misconduct.
'
941111:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 112a: Wrongful use of methamphetamine on or about 941003.
         Award: Forfeiture of $300.00 per month for 2 months (suspended for 6 months), restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to E-1. No indication of appeal in the record.
941112:  NAVDRUGLAB, SAN DIEGO, CA urinalysis report received on 941025 tested positive for amphetamine/methamphetamine.

941216:  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 your Admiral's Mast conviction on 970707 for violation of Article 92 of the UCMJ; dereliction of duty, and by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse as evidenced by the urine sample you provided on 941005 testing positive for methamphetamine.
941216:          Applicant advised of his rights and having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to appear before an Administrative Discharge Board.

950117:  DAAR indicates applicant tested positive for methamphetamine as a result of a random urinalysis, found not dependent by medical officer, recommended for separation not via VA Hospital.
950130:  An Administrative Discharge Board, based upon a preponderance of the evidence and by unanimous vote, found that the applicant had committed misconduct due commission of a serious offense and misconduct due to drug abuse, that the misconduct warranted separation, and recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions.

950526:  Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse (use).

950622:  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 950706 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 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 | 1999_Navy | ND99-00968

    Original file (ND99-00968.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    921208: 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, recommended applicant be retained. 950407: 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00677

    Original file (ND01-00677.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00677 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010420, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. Relief based on this issue is not warranted.The applicant’s issue 3 states: “We refer this case to the Board for their careful and compassionate consideration and request the applicant's discharge be reviewed for Clemency due to post service.” The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the re...

  • 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 | 2003_Navy | ND03-01361

    Original file (ND03-01361.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. 941208: 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 general under honorable conditions. Verifiable proof of any post-service accomplishments must be provided in order for the Applicant...

  • 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 | ND03-01108

    Original file (ND03-01108.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. I made a few West-Pac tours on the Okinawa and made two trips to the Persian Gulf on mine sweeping operations. 980511: 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-01072

    Original file (ND00-01072.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    My discharge was inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident in 67 months of outstanding performance of service, as my enlisted service record indicate. 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 states in issue 1 that his “discharge is inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident.” The Board found that the applicant...

  • USMC | DRB | 2000_Marine | MD00-00471

    Original file (MD00-00471.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Statement from applicant, dated February 3, 2000 Character reference from manager of Pep Boys Copy of applicant's DD Form 214 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: USMC 840820 - 880712 HON Inactive: USMCR(J) 831031 - 840819 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 880713 Date of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00251

    Original file (ND02-00251.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 None Inactive: USNR (DEP) 910221 - 910530 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 910531 Date of Discharge: 930222 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 01 08 22 Inactive: None CA action 930122: Sentence approved and ordered...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-01140

    Original file (ND01-01140.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-AMSAN, USN Docket No. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 Five pages from applicant's service record PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: USNR (DEP) 900427 - 900711 COG Period of Service Under Review...