Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00905
Original file (ND02-00905.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-FR, USN
Docket No. ND02-00905

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 020610, 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 030311. 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 3630620.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as submitted

1. My deviant behavior during my service with the Navy was an isolated and unfortunate incident. I have never before or after behaved in such a manner. I wish to become the most positive contributing member to society that I can be and am concerned that the stigma of an other than honorable discharge will keep me from reaching my full potential.
I made a mistake once. I have done my time, please don't let it mark me for life.
Thank-you for your time and consideration.

 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)     940819 - 960402  COG
         Active: None

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 950403               Date of Discharge: 961120

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 01 07 18
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 19                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 97

 Highest Rate: SN

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.80 (1)    Behavior: 4.00 (1)                OTA: 4.00

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: None

 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 3630620.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

951201:  Special Court-Martial.
         Charge I: violation of the UCMJ, Article 112a, (5 specifications):
         Specification 1: Wrongful use of lysergic acid diethylamide on 950915.
         Specification 2: Wrongful possession of five hits of lysergic acid diethylamide with intent to distribute on 950915.
         Specification 3: Wrongfully distribute one hit of lysergic acid diethylamide to a civilian on 950915.
         Specification 4: Wrongfully distribute one hit of lysergic acid diethylamide to SA on 950915.
         Specification 5: Wrongfully distribute one hit of lysergic acid diethylamide to SA on 950915.
         Findings: to Charge I and specifications thereunder, guilty.
         Sentence: CHL for 4 months, forfeiture of $560 per month for 6 months, bad conduct discharge.
         CA 960305: Sentence approved and ordered executed, except for confinement in excess of 25 days and the bad conduct discharge is suspended for 6 months, at which time, unless the suspension is sooner vacated, the suspended part of the sentence will be remitted without further action.

960810:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse as evidenced by a special court-martial conviction of 8 December 1995.
960810:  Applicant advised of her rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights.
960828:  Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse (use). Commanding Officer’s comments (verbatim): FR (Applicant) was convicted at a special court-martial for drug abuse and was further sentenced to be discharged with a bad conduct discharge. The convening authority has granted clemency in this case, in that the bad conduct discharge was suspended for six months, at which time, unless the suspension is sooner vacated, the suspended part of the sentence will be remitted without further action. FR (Applicant) has no potential for further military service. Through her own actions she has shown a total disregard for rules and regulations and the spirit and intent of good order and discipline. In addition, her offenses bring discredit upon the armed forces. It is recommended that she be separated with an other than honorable discharge.

960927:  BUPERS 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 961120 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. There is credible evidence in the record that the Applicant used illegal drugs. Drug abuse warranted processing for separation, normally under other than honorable conditions. The Applicant’s discharge characterization accurately reflects her service to her country. Normally, to permit relief, an error or inequity must have existed during the period of enlistment in question. No such error or inequity is evident 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. Relief denied.

The Applicant 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. Representation at a personal appearance hearing is recommended but not required.


Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

 A . Navy Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 14, effective
03 Oct 96 until 11 Dec 97, Article 3630620 SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL 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 | 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 | 1999_Navy | ND99-00026

    Original file (ND99-00026.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    No indication of appeal in the record.971107: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse as evidenced by applicant’s positive urinalysis for use of lysergic acid diethylamide on or about 21 August 1997.971107: Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights.971114: Commanding officer directed discharge general...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00190

    Original file (ND01-00190.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-HTFN, USN Docket No. ND01-00190 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 001205, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00615

    Original file (ND01-00615.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I am requesting that my discharge be upgraded to the highest possible level due to the fact that I had one isolated incident in 30 months of service, and have otherwise an exemplary service record. The summary of service clearly documents that drug abuse was the reason the applicant was discharged. Navy Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 9/94, effective 22 Jul 94 until 02 Oct 96, Article 3630620, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED MEMBERS BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT DUE TO DRUG ABUSE B.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00586

    Original file (ND02-00586.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    001027: Assistant Secretary of the Navy (Manpower and Reserve Affairs) approved Applicant's discharge with a discharge characterization of general (under honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged on 001228 with a discharge characterization of general (under honorable conditions) for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (A). The Applicant

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00924

    Original file (ND01-00924.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00924 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010711, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. Thank you for your time and understanding I served the navy proudly and admirably for two years, with the exception of one stupid mistake. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00383

    Original file (ND03-00383.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-00383 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 20030107, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable and the reason for the discharge be changed to Secretarial Authority or Completion of Required Service. The Board’s vote was three to two that the character of the discharge and the narrative reason for the discharge will change. PART IV - INFORMATION FOR THE APPLICANT If you believe that the decision in your case is...

  • USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1500248

    Original file (MD1500248.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, and discharge process, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall remain BAD CONDUCT DISCHARGE and the narrative reason for separation shall remain COURT-MARTIAL. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00402

    Original file (ND01-00402.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation Only the applicant's service and medical records were reviewed, as the applicant did not provide additional documentation for the Board to consider. 900917: Special Court Martial Charge I: violation of UCMJ, Article 86 Specification - Unauthorized absence from on or about 18 Jun 1990 until on or about 22 June 1990. 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00120

    Original file (MD02-00120.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD02-00120 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 011017, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. 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. It is my opinion that I wasn't accurately discharged based upon the fact that in 26 months of...