Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00170
Original file (ND02-00170.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-ETSN, USN
Docket No. ND02-00170

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 011213, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. The applicant did not designate a representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 020701. 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, as submitted

 1. I, M_ K_, have become a devoted wife and full time mother. Family has become very important me, I am so thankful for the opportunity to stay at home with my children. My long term goals include obtaining a degree in computer science and adding a new name to our family tree. Thank you for considering my request.

 Documentation
Only the service and medical records were reviewed, as the applicant did not provide additional documentation for the Board to consider.

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: None
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     970311 - 971006  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 971007               Date of Discharge: 990803

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 01 09 27
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 19                          Years Contracted: 4 (24 month extension)

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 80

 Highest Rate: ET3

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: NMF*        Behavior: NMF             OTA: NMF

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: None

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

*No Marks Found in service record.

 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 :
980715:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 134: destruction of property to prevent seizure; violation of UCMJ, Article 107: false official statement.
         Award: Forfeiture of $242 per month for 1 month, restriction and extra duty for 14 days, reduction to E-1 (suspended for 6 months). No indication of appeal in the record.
990628:  NAVDRUGLAB, San Diego, CA report: Urine sample received 21Jun99, positive for cocaine.
990709:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 112a: wrongfully use of controlled substance - cocaine).
         Award: Restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to E-3. No indication of appeal in the record.
990712:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse as evidenced by positive urinalysis of 15 Jun 1999, for cocaine.
990712:  Applicant advised of her 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.
990712:  Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse (use). Commanding Officer’s comments (verbatim): "Seaman D_ pled guilty at Captain's Mast for a violation of the UCMJ, Article 112a, 1 Specification. When questioned as to whether or not she understood the Navy's "Zero Tolerance" policy on illegal drug use, she responded in the affirmative. Seaman D_ offered no explanation for her actions, nor did she offer any further evidence in her behalf. Accordingly, I find that Seaman D_ is militarily unsuitable for retention due to drug abuse and recommend that she be administratively separated from the naval service”.

990714:  Commander, Navy Region Hawaii 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 990803 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 discharge characterization accurately reflects her service to her 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, a positive employment record, documentation of community service, certification of non-involvement with civil authorities and proof of her 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 her discharge. She is reminded that she remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of her 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 24, effective 20 May 99 until 26 March 2000, 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 | ND02-00485

    Original file (ND02-00485.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00485 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020312, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION 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.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00852

    Original file (ND04-00852.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant’s DD Form 214 (Member 1 and 4) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 010119 - 010220 COG Active: None Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 010221...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-01012

    Original file (ND01-01012.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: None Inactive: None Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 970227 Date of Discharge: 990920 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 02 00 17 Inactive: 00 06 06 No indication of appeal in the record.990803: Applicant...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00280

    Original file (ND03-00280.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 20031114. 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): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 000504 - 000516 COG Active: None Period of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00406

    Original file (ND04-00406.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be entry level separation or uncharacterized. The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review. 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.

  • 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.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00044

    Original file (ND00-00044.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00044 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 991018, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to Honorable and the reason for the discharge be changed to issues. Furthermore, RMSA (applicant) claimed to not know what she had smoked. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00271

    Original file (ND01-00271.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    (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 her application. 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) 960314 -...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00716

    Original file (ND00-00716.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In the acknowledgement letter to the applicant, the applicant was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing. Decision A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 001206. No further information found in service record.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00582

    Original file (ND04-00582.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. I ask that you as a Review Board consider my service record and the supporting documentation that I have enclosed with this letter in your review. There is no law or regulation that provides recharacterization solely on the issue of obtaining Veterans' benefits, or enhancing employment and educational opportunities and this issue does not serve to...