Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-01086
Original file (ND01-01086.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-OS3, USN
Docket No. ND01-01086

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 010820, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions. 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 020328. 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. I think my discharge was not the right one because this was the first time that I was in trouble and I had a excellent record. I made E-5 in 2 years and have been a very solid soldier. I am trying to go on and was trying to start a new life. I think that I would still be in if I would have had a second chance. I have attached some character letters that will hopefully tell you about me. I hope that you will give me a good discharge that will be useful. Thank you

 Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
Character reference dated March 20, 2001
Character reference undated
Character reference dated March 20, 2001
Character reference, undated

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: None
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     980226 - 980315  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 980316               Date of Discharge: 000901

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 02 05 16
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 20                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 65

 Highest Rate: OS2

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: NMF                           Behavior: NMF             OTA: NMF

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: Letter of Commendation

 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 :

000808:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 112A: Wrongfully use THC between 4Jul00 and 14Jul00.
         Award: Forfeiture of $630.30 per month for 2 months, restriction for 60 days, reduction to OS3. Forfeiture and reduction suspended for 6 months. No indication of appeal in the record.
000808:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.
000808:  Applicant advised of his rights and having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to appear before an Administrative Discharge Board.
000821:  Applicant waived Administrative Discharge Board.

 000821:  Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse (use).

000822:  CNPC 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 000901 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’s performance prior to the drug abuse doesn’t mitigate his use of illegal drugs. The applicant implies that a permissive doctrine exists whereby one in the military is allowed a “single misdeed”. 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 used illegal drugs. Drug abuse warranted processing for separation, normally under other than honorable conditions. The discharge was proper and equitable. Relief denied.

 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 27, effective 27 March 2000 - 11 Feb 2001, 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 | 2000_Navy | ND00-00424

    Original file (ND00-00424.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    991021: 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). The attached documents along with my service record will that my general discharge should be upgraded.” The NDRB found the applicant’s issue without merit. After review of the applicant’s record the NDRB found,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00779

    Original file (ND04-00779.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The Applicant contends that he was “acquitted of the charges that were brought against me.” The record shows that the Applicant pled guilty pursuant to a plea agreement for possession of a controlled substance. As of this time, the Applicant has not provided any documentation for the Board to consider.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-01189

    Original file (ND02-01189.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Copy of 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: 980910 Date of Discharge: 000908 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 01 11 29 (Does not exclude lost time and confinement time.) Chronological Listing of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-01126

    Original file (ND02-01126.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-OS3, USN Docket No. BECAUSE OF MY DISCHARGE, I AM NOT ABLE TO SEEK EMPLOYMENT WITH MANY AGENCIES THAT REQUIRE MY DISCHARGE TO BE OF A DIFFERENT STATUS.ISSUE 2 MY MILITARY CAREER REALLY MEANT ALOT TO ME. The Board found that the positive aspects of the Applicant’s record resulted in a discharge under honorable conditions (general), vice under other than honorable conditions.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00161

    Original file (ND00-00161.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 990125 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 | 2001_Navy | ND01-00858

    Original file (ND01-00858.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: USN 930414 - 951112 HON Inactive: USNR (DEP) 921021 - 930413 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 951113 Date of Discharge: 000808 Length of Service (years, months, days): Active: 04 08 25 Inactive: None Age at Entry: 21...

  • 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 | 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 | 2002_Navy | ND02-00104

    Original file (ND02-00104.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board’s vote was unanimous that the character of service shall be administratively corrected to reflect the characterization of service directed by the applicant’s Commanding Officer: UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL)/MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-146, formerly Article 3630620 but the characterization of service shall not be upgraded to "honorable", as requested.The NDRB did note an administrative error on the original DD Form 214. PART III – RATIONALE FOR...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00412

    Original file (ND00-00412.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00412 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000210, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. I ask please grant me this upgrade so that I can get a good job and take care of my family. At this time, the applicant has not provided any documentation of good character and conduct.