Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00195
Original file (ND01-00195.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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


ex-RMSN, USN
Docket No. ND01-00195

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 001205, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions. The applicant requested a personal appearance hearing discharge review before a traveling panel closest to Austin, TX. The applicant listed Civilian Counsel as his representative on the DD Form 293. In the acknowledgement letter to the applicant, he was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) does not travel, all hearing are held in the Washington, DC Area. The Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) also advised that the board first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 010510. 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 (verbatim)
1. My waiver of military counsel and separation board was done pursuant to advice from my command and under duress from current circumstances.

 2. Because I unwittingly waived counsel and a separation board, the one alleged act of misconduct upon which the separation was based has never been investigated.

3. Considering my record of service, a UOTHC discharge is too severe a penalty for the single alleged act of misconduct.

4. The UOTHC discharge has prevented me from obtaining meaningful employment or financial assistance to attend schooling in order to improve my employability.

Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
Letter from Counsel (6pgs)
Copy of DD Form 214
 Appeal of NJP
 Notification of Admin Board Procedure Proposed Action (3pgs)
Petition of Dissolution of Marriage (14pgs)
 Certificate of Graduation (Basic Boat Coxswain)
 Second Class Swimmer Qualification
Enlisted Performance Evaluation Reports (10pgs)
 Copy from Medical Record
 Copy of Administrative Remarks (BUDS Disenrollment)
Evaluation Report & Counseling Record (4pgs)
 ESWS Administrative Remarks
 Service Related Documents (55pgs)


PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: USN                        None
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     920710 - 920720  COG
Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 920721               Date of Discharge: 970318

 Length of Service (years, months, days):
         Active: 04 07 27
          Inactive: None
Age at Entry: 19                          Years Contracted: 4 (17 months extension)

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 77
Highest Rate: BM3

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):
Performance: 3.80 (6)    Behavior: 3.80 (6)                OTA: 3.80        4.0 Evals
 Performance: 3.00 (1)    Behavior: 1.00 (1)                OTA: 2.29        5.0 Evals
Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: ESWS, GCM, NDSM, SASM, NAVY"E"RIBBON, SSDR

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 :

930618:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Failing to go or leaving place of duty.
         Award: Forfeiture of $150.00 per month for 1 month, restriction and extra duty for 3 days. No indication of appeal in the record.

 970130:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 117: Provoking Speech or Gestures.
         Award: Restriction and extra duty for 3 days, reduction to E-3. Appealed. Appeal granted [Extracted from Case file].
970307:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 112a: Wrongful use and possession of a controlled substance (LSD).
         Award: No adjudication found in record. [Extracted from Evaluation Report & Counseling Record dtd 970318 in case file].
970307:  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 one non-judicial punishment of wrongful use of a controlled substance (LSD) [Extracted from case file].
NO DISCHARGE PACKAGE AVAILABLE

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT
REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 970318 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 response to applicant’s issues 1 and 2, the Board determined that to permit relief for these issues, an error or injustice must be found to have existed during the period of enlistment under review . There was nothing in the records, nor did the applicant provide any documentation, to indicate there existed an error of fact, law, procedure, or discretion at the time of discharge. Because of this, the NDRB has to assume regularity in government affairs. The Board could find no rights violations nor any basis for relief concerning these issues.
In response to applicant’s issue 3, the applicant implies that a permissive doctrine exists whereby one in the military is allowed a "single alleged act of misconduct". The Board believes that the applicant is confusing this with the civilian world wherein some offenses are treated with leniency because they are a first time incident on an otherwise clear record. No such leniency exists in the military. The applicant is responsible for his actions and must accept the consequences of his misdeeds. The Board will not grant relief on the basis of this issue.
In response to applicant’s issue 4, the Board has no obligation to change the applicant’s discharge in order to allow him to obtain better employment or to allow him to go back to school. This is not an issue for which the Board will grant relief.
The following is provided for the applicant’s edification. 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. However, the Board is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge (E). Those factors include, but are not limited to, the following: evidence of continuing educational pursuits (transcripts, diplomas, degrees, vocational-technical certificates), a verifiable employment record (Letter of Recommendation from boss), documentation of community service (letter from the activity/community group), certification of non-involvement with civil authorities (police records check) and proof of his not using drugs (detoxification certificate, AA meeting attendance or letter documenting participation in the program) in order for consideration for clemency based on post-service conduct. At this time, the applicant has not provided any post-service documentation of good character and conduct. Therefore no relief will be granted. The applicant is strongly encouraged to continue with his pursuits and to apply for a personal appearance hearing. The application must be received within 15-years from the date of discharge.

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 | ND01-00942

    Original file (ND01-00942.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    There is no requirement or law that grants recharacterization solely on the issue of obtaining veterans’ benefits and this issue does not serve to provide a foundation upon which the Board can grant relief. The applicant is reminded that he remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of his discharge. PART IV - INFORMATION FOR THE APPLICANT If you believe that the decision in your case is unclear, not...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-01138

    Original file (ND01-01138.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 971126 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).The applicant introduced no decisional issues for consideration by the Board. PART IV - INFORMATION FOR THE APPLICANT If...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00170

    Original file (ND00-00170.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I have reviewed my service record and there is no indication of a positive result on a drug test. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 970624 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to drug abuse (use) (A). 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00460

    Original file (ND01-00460.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-ADAN, USN Docket No. ND01-00460 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010301, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00190

    Original file (ND01-00190.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-HTFN, USN Docket No. ND01-00190 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 001205, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-01023

    Original file (ND01-01023.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) also advised that the board first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 981122 general under honorable conditions for misconduct due to drug abuse (use) (A). No other narrative reason for separation more clearly describes the conditions surrounding his discharge.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00229

    Original file (ND03-00229.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. “I was discharged from the U.S. Navy under other than honorable conditions due to the use of drugs. No indication of appeal in the record.960510: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse as evidenced by nonjudicial punishment of 960509 for violation of Article 112A of the Uniform...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01327

    Original file (ND03-01327.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION 910301: 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 honorable conditions (general). As of this time, the Applicant has not provided any documentation for the Board to consider.

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00170

    Original file (ND99-00170.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND99-00170 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 981113, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. In the acknowledgement letter to the applicant, he was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing. THE MARIJUANA THAT WE SMOKED WAS THE MARIJUANA THAT H_ HAD GIVEN ME IN JANUARY.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00309

    Original file (ND02-00309.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    My enlistment was a four year active duty contract in the Navy. I was discharged in 1996. These were not the jobs of my choice but I took pride in them and realized that at least I was working.