Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00275
Original file (ND01-00275.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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


ex-SR, USN
Docket No. ND01-00275

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 010808. 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 - Pattern of misconduct, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.


PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION


Issues (verbatim)

1. I am requesting this upgrade because aid can be render by VA. At this time this aid is useless unless I have an upgrade. Furthermore the transitional living community recovery program last just 3 mons. I would & do need additional treatment after this program. VA will assist me if my discharge is upgraded.
Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
Letter from Transitional Living Communities dated October 31, 2000
Copy of Big Book Study Relapse Prevention log sheet for applicant

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: None
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     880718 - 880727  COG
Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 880728               Date of Discharge: 900813

 Length of Service (years, months, days):
         Active: 02 00 16
          Inactive: None
Age at Entry: 30                          Years Contracted: 4
Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 66

 Highest Rate: SA
Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.20 (1)    Behavior: 3.00 (2)                OTA: 3.20
Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: None
Days of Unauthorized Absence: 12

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/Misconduct - Pattern of misconduct, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.
Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

880731:  Applicant briefed on Navy's policy on drug and alcohol abuse.
881129:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 112 (2 specs): (1) Drunk on duty on 1030, 17Nov88, (2) Drunk on duty on 0918, 23Nov88.
         Award: Forfeiture of $200 per month for 2 months, reduction to SR. Reduction suspended for 6 months. No indication of appeal in the record.
881129:  Retention Warning from Naval Submarine School: Advised of deficiency (Drunk on duty.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

890316:  NAVDRUGLAB, Jacksonville, FL reports applicant's urine sample, received 890309, tested positive for cocaine.
890331:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence on 0640, 22Feb89 to 1630, 25Feb89 (3 days/surrendered), violation of UCMJ, Article 112A: Wrongful use of a controlled substance, to wit: cocaine violation of UCMJ, Article 134 (2 specs): Disorderly conduct on 16Mar89; drunkenness on 17Mar89.
         Award: Forfeiture of $349 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to SR. No indication of appeal in the record.
890602:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence on 0650, 16May89 to 1750, 19May89 (3 days/surrendered).
         Award: Restriction and extra duty for 30 days. No indication of appeal in the record.
891018:  Retention Warning from USS CARON (DD-970): Advised of deficiency (Excessive alcohol consumption has caused your work performance to decline. In addition, your personal behavior while under the influence of alcohol is unacceptable.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

891117:  Applicant to unauthorized absence 0650, 17Nov89.

 891118:  Applicant from unauthorized absence 0650, 18Nov89 (1 day/surrendered).
900111:  Applicant diagnosed as alcohol dependent. Urine screened positive for cocaine.
900221:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence on 0650, 2Feb90 to 0650, 7Feb90 (5 days/surrendered), violation of UCMJ, Article 87: Missing movement on 3Feb90, violation of UCMJ, Article 112A: Wrongful use of a controlled substance.
         Award: Forfeiture of $349 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days. No indication of appeal in the record.
900223:  USS CARON (DD-970) notified applicant of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of alcohol abuse rehabilitation failure, misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct, misconduct due to commission of a serious offense and misconduct due to drug abuse.
900223:          Applicant advised of his rights and having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to appear before an Administrative Discharge Board. [Date estimated.]
900504:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence on 0715-1115, 16Apr90.
         Award: Restriction and extra duty for 30 days. No indication of appeal in the record.
900505:  An Administrative Discharge Board, based upon a preponderance of the evidence and by unanimous vote, found that the applicant had committed misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct, commission of a serious offense and drug abuse, that the misconduct warranted separation, and recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions.
900531:  Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.
900614:  CNMPC directed the applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT
REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 900813 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct (A and B). The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (C). 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 response to the applicant’s issue, the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) is a separate agency that makes its own determinations on VA eligibility. There is no requirement or law that grants recharacterization based solely on the issue of obtaining veteran's benefits. The Board encourages the applicant to contact his nearest DVA Regional Office for further information regarding his VA eligibility. This is not an issue for which the Board will grant relief.
The following is provided for the applicant’s edification. The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge (E). 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. 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. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560A, Change 8 effective 21 Aug 89 until 14 Aug 91), Article 3630600, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT A PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT.

B. Under the Manual for Courts-Martial, a punitive discharge is authorized for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Article 112A, for wrongful use of a controlled substance, if adjudged at a Special or General Court-Martial.
C. 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.

D. 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.
E. 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 “ afls10.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 | 2003_Navy | ND03-00341

    Original file (ND03-00341.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The first indication that SR A_ (Applicant) had actually gotten married was when the command was notified of his problems with an auto-rental agency. SR A_ (Applicant) stated that the next day his sister took him to the airport and was in an accident on her return so he returned home again.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501331

    Original file (ND0501331.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable or general (under honorable conditions) and the Narrative Reason for Separation be changed. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION Issues, as stated Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:“To obtain employment, at the time of discharge PRES B_ stated that and upgrade would be given upon request due to war.” The names, and votes of the members of the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00252

    Original file (ND01-00252.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    890705: Retention Warning from Naval Submarine School: Advised of deficiency (Abandoning watch or guard and failing to go to appointed place of duty at the prescribed time. Award: Forfeiture of $345 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 21 days, reduction to SR. No indication of appeal in the record.891215: Retention Warning from USS PEORIA (LST 1183): Advised of deficiency (Below average performance and non-conformity to naval rules and authority. 901120: Applicant from...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00982

    Original file (ND02-00982.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 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: None Active: None Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 870114 Date of Discharge: 881208 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 01 02 25 Inactive: 00 07 29 The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00129

    Original file (ND03-00129.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    No indication of appeal in the record.881129: Retention Warning from [SSC, NTC, San Diego, CA]: Advised of deficiency (Violation of the UCMJ Article 92: Failure to obey a lawful order. No indication of appeal in the record.Retention Warning from [SSC, NTC, San Diego, CA]: Advised of deficiency (Violation of the UCMJ Article 86. At this time, the applicant has not provided any documentation for the Board to consider.

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00072

    Original file (ND99-00072.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I didn't know how to cope with the loss of my mother at the time of my active duty. Sincerly Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 Twelve 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) 840531 - 840717 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 840718...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500280

    Original file (ND0500280.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Documentation Only the service record was reviewed. No indication of appeal in the record.BUPERS directed the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.910617: Applicant to unauthorized absence at 0700 on 910617.910705: Applicant discharged in absentia.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00158

    Original file (ND04-00158.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant contends that his discharge was unfair and that he was a “model soldier.” When the service of a member of U.S. Navy has been honest and faithful, it is appropriate to characterize that service as honorable or under honorable conditons. The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, reflects his willful failure to meet the requirements of his contract with the U.S. Navy and falls far short of that required for an upgrade of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-01008

    Original file (ND99-01008.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 attached letter, the Board sited the following issues: Youth and immaturity, post-service achievements (hard working family man), and difficulty explaining discharge characterization to potential employers. The NDRB reviews the propriety (did the Navy follow its own rules in processing the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00709

    Original file (ND99-00709.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. Unauthorized absence since 900804.901015: Applicant surrendered from unauthorized absence 1135, 901015.901214: Summary Court Martial Charge I: violation of the UCMJ, Article 86. You may obtain a copy of DoD Directive 1332.28 by writing to: DA Military Review Boards Agency Management Information and Support...