Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00553
Original file (ND01-00553.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-AKAA, USN
Docket No. ND01-00553

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 010321, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions or entry level separation or uncharacterized. The applicant requested a personal appearance hearing before a traveling panel closest to Norfolk, VA. The applicant did not list any 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 hearings are held in the Washington DC area. The 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 011031. 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

1. My discharge was undeserving in the sense I have never used marijuana, but instead they never listened to my story. My division nor the C.O. When I was in I was basically a model sailor. I was SK of the month in my division in Oct. 97. Made 3 rd the first time around, but was never able to put it on. I was on time daily and did a great job everyday only to receive low evals. My division never went to bat for me in my situation. It is hard to fight something of this nature when your own division isnt at your back. I love the military and would have never done anything of that nature. My main issue is I would like to be heard by an impartial review board.

 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: None
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     961108 - 961208  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 961209                        Date of Discharge: 990616

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 02 06 08
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 17 Parent Consent                  Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 12                                 AFQT: 53

 Highest Rate: AKAN

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: NMF                  Behavior: NMF             OTA: NMF

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: SSDR, AFEM, NUC, NER

 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 :

980608:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 128: Assault upon a civilian by pointing a dangerous weapon likely to produce death or grievous bodily harm on 21Apr98.
         Award: Forfeiture of $463 per month for 1 month, restriction and extra duty for 30 days, reduction to AKAA. Reduction suspended for 6 months. No indication of appeal in the record.
980608:  Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (Assault upon a civilian by pointing a dangerous weapon likely to produce death or grievous bodily harm on 21 Apr 98), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

990428:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 112A: Wrongful use of marijuana on 18Mar99.
         Award: Forfeiture of $538 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to AKAA. No indication of appeal in the record.
990507:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to pattern of misconduct as evidenced by your punishments in your current enlistment, commission of a serious offense as evidenced by his Commanding Officer's nonjudicial punishment held on 8 June 1998, for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Article 128, assault upon a civilian by pointing a dangerous weapon likely to produce death or grievous bodily harm on 21 April 1998, and drug abuse as evidenced by your Commanding Officer's nonjudicial punishment held on 28 April 1999, for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Article 112A, wrongful use of marijuana on 18 March 1999.
990507:  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.
990515:  Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to pattern of misconduct, commission of a serious offense and drug abuse (use).

990601:  Commander, Cruiser Destroyer Group TWO 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 990616 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).

Issue 1. The applicant offered no documentation to support his allegation that he did not use illegal drugs. Under other than honorable conditions is warranted when significant negative aspects of a member's conduct or performance of duty outweigh the positive aspects of the member's military record. T he applicant’s service was marred by award of nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for offenses triable by court-martial on two occasions. The applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, reflects his willful disobedience of the orders and directives which regulate good order and discipline in naval service, and falls short of that required for an upgrade.

 The applicant’s discharge characterization accurately reflects his service to his country. The discharge was proper and equitable. Normally, to permit relief, an error or injustice must have existed during the period of enlistment in question. No such error or injustice occurred during the applicant’s enlistment. Additionally, 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 leaving the service. However, the NDRB is authorized to consider outstanding post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge, 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. Verifiable proof of any post-service accomplishments must be provided in order for the applicant to claim post-service conduct and behavior as a reason to upgrade a less than Honorable discharge. 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 provided to receive consideration for relief, based on post-service conduct. The applicant did not provide sufficient documentation to warrant an upgrade to his discharge. He 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. The applicant can provide additional documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments at that time. Legal representation at a personal appearance hearing is highly recommended but not required. 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 " 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 | 2002_Navy | ND02-00207

    Original file (ND02-00207.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board’s vote was unanimous that the character of the discharge shall not change. ]990423: Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse (use). 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.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00205

    Original file (ND04-00205.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND04-00205 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20031117. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. 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:

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00630

    Original file (ND03-00630.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Decision A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20040128. Award: Forfeiture of ½ months pay for 2 months, restriction for 60 days, reduction to SR. No indication of appeal in the record.000922: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.000922: Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00513

    Original file (ND99-00513.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND99-00513 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 990301, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 980519 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to drug abuse (use) (A). The applicant’s first issue (equity) states the discharge authority did not consider his 33 months...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00198

    Original file (ND00-00198.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00198 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 991124, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to Honorable. No indication of appeal in the record.980706: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under Other Than Honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to Drug abuse as evidenced by your nonjudicial punishment on 29 June 1998 for the wrongful use of marijuana, in violation of Article 112a,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00461

    Original file (ND02-00461.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00461 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020304, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. Specification 1: Unauthorized absence 980630-980704 (5 days). Additionally, 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 leaving the service.

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00581

    Original file (ND99-00581.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND99-00581 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 990322, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. No indication of appeal in the record.980505: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 112a: wrongful use of a controlled substance.Award: Forfeiture of half a months pay per month for 2 month(s), restriction and extra duty for 45 days. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00906

    Original file (ND99-00906.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    AA (applicant) should be separated from Naval service with an Other than Honorable discharge. I most strongly recommended he be discharged from Naval service with an Other than Honorable discharge.980428: Commander, Cruiser-Destroyer Group ONE directed the applicant's discharge general (under honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse (use). Responding to the applicant’s request for a reason change, the applicant’s misconduct is clearly documented in the service record.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00949

    Original file (ND01-00949.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Naval Activities, Spain directed the applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse (use). 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. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00583

    Original file (ND02-00583.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. My reason(s) for submitting this letter to Naval Council of Personnel Boards is to first, thank you for allowing me to voice an apology to the United States Military. A request for waiver is normally done only during the processing of a formal application for enlistment through a recruiter.