Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00273
Original file (ND01-00273.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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


ex-EMFN, USN
Docket No. ND01-00273

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 010103, 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 010601. 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 1910-146, formerly Article 3630620.





PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues (verbatim)

1. I feel that my discharge should be upgraded for the following reasons. The first reason is in the 4 years I was in the service I lived up to the core values of honor, courage, and commitment to the fullest. I always tried to be a leader in the best way. My Navy record from day 1 shows that. The second and most important is that my lawyer did not persue questing any parties to ensure my not being guilty of the charge. I feel strongly that if he had then I would not be writing you this memo.
Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
Character reference dated December 17, 2000

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: None
          Inactive: USNR (DEP)     931105 - 940530  COG
Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 940601               Date of Discharge: 980530

 Length of Service (years, months, days):
         Active: 04 00 00
          Inactive: None
Age at Entry: 18                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 48
Highest Rate: EM3

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.80 (5)    Behavior: 3.60 (5)                OTA: 3.52
Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM, NMUC, AFEM, SSDR, GCM
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 1910-146, formerly 3630620.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

980228:  Medical evaluation for drug abuse found the applicant to not be drug dependent.
980303:  Drug and Alcohol Abuse Report: Amphetamines abuse, ashore off duty. Random urinalysis 980224. Physician found applicant not dependent and recommended separate not via VA hospital. Commanding officer recommended separate not via VA hospital.
980311:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 112A: Wrongfully use amphetamine and methamphetamine between 7Feb98 and 9Feb98.
         Award: Forfeiture of $592 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to EMFN. No indication of appeal in the record.
980522:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.
980522:          Applicant advised of his rights and having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to appear before an Administrative Discharge Board.
980522:  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.
980527:  Commanding officer (USS CARL VINSON (CVN 70)) recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse (use).

980529:  Commanding Officer, Naval Air Station, Whidbey Island 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 980530 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 the applicant’s issue, the Board found nothing in the records, nor did the applicant provide anything to indicate or to show that there exists an error of fact, law, procedure, or discretion associated with his discharge at the time of its issuance, and that his rights were prejudiced thereby. Furthermore, there has been no change in policy by the Navy, or higher authority, made expressly retroactive to the type of discharge received by the applicant.

 The following is provided for the applicant’s edification. The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. However, 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, is considered. The applicant provided one character reference as documentation of his post-service. The applicant's efforts need to be more encompassing than those provided. The applicant should have produced evidence of continuing educational pursuits, a verifiable employment record, documentation of community service, certification of non-involvement with civil authorities and proof of his not using drugs in order for consideration for clemency based on post-service conduct. At this time the applicant has not provided sufficient documentation of good character and conduct. Therefore no relief will be granted. He is encouraged to continue with his pursuits and is reminded that he is eligible for a personal appearance hearing provided the application is received within 15 years from the date of discharge. Relief denied.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)
A . The Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 18, effective 12 Dec 97 to 19 May 99, Article 1910-146 (formerly 3630620), Separation 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 | 2004_Navy | ND04-00137

    Original file (ND04-00137.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) advised that the board first conduct a documentary record review prior to any personal appearance hearing. Appeal denied 030206.030214: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.030214: Applicant advised of rights and having consulted with...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00664

    Original file (ND03-00664.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions and the reason for the discharge be changed to “single misconduct incident.” The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review. (Equity Issue) This former member further requests that the Board include provisions of SECNAVINST 5420.174C, enclosure (1), Chapter 9, as it pertains to post-service conduct, in assessing the merits of the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00040

    Original file (ND00-00040.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).In the applicant’s issue 1, the Board determined this issue is without merit. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00074

    Original file (ND00-00074.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).In response to applicant’s issue 1, 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. At this time, the applicant has not provided any documentation of good character and...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00585

    Original file (ND03-00585.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Member was found non drug dependent.980213: Commander, Cruiser-Destroyer Group ONE directed the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse (use). 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 civilian life subsequent to...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00510

    Original file (ND01-00510.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    So I respectfully request to put my past behind me and be granted to feel proud of my enlistment while in the USN. 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 applicant states that his “discharge was inequitable because it was based on a single action in 29 month of service.” The Board found that the applicant had several...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00041

    Original file (ND03-00041.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-00041 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 20021007, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions. No indication of appeal in the record.991215: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse and misconduct due to pattern of misconduct.991215: Applicant advised of his rights and having...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01081

    Original file (ND03-01081.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. 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. The Applicant can provide documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments or any other evidence related to his discharge at that time.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00013

    Original file (ND03-00013.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant’s DD Form 214 Twelve pages from Applicant’s service PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 960627 - 961021 COG Active: None Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 961022 Date of Discharge: 990122 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 02 03 01 Inactive:...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00669

    Original file (ND04-00669.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general. Decision A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20041008. 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.