Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-01153
Original file (ND02-01153.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-RMSA, USN
Docket No. ND02-01153

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 020814, 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 030602. 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: GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-146, formerly Article 3630620.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as submitted

1. I joined the United States Navy at the age of 17 and tried to create a better life for myself. Unfortunately I had let personal matters affect my ability to do my job 110%. I had asked for help for my problems but due to the nature I was told I could no longer remain in the military. I sought rehabilitation for my addictions and although it has been a few painful years I am still on my road to recovery. I attended a community college in Chicago working towards a nursing degree and hope to get my bachelors. I also am working as an accounts representative for a finance company. My future goal is to go to a good college and give to communities that would need my help. Furthermore, I had been tested positive until after the fact that I had told them I had a problem and also because I was told I would get help and be kept in the military! This concludes my case for deliberation, but let me also add that in my short career in the Navy it was enjoyable and I might have stayed.

 Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
Copy of DD Form 214
Letter of Appreciation dated July 22, 1996
Letter of Appreciation dated June 10, 1997
Certificate of Completion (Multilevel Mail Server REL 2.0 Operator Training) for September 1996
Certificate of Completion (NOVA Computer Operations) November 1996
Certificate of Completion (Personal Control Skills for Prevention of Alcohol and other Drug Abuse, other high risk behavior, and Promotion of Individual Readiness) dated August 15, 1996

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     950120 - 950919  COG
         Active: USN                        None

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 950920               Date of Discharge: 971215

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 02 02 26
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 17                          Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 69

 Highest Rate: RMSN

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 2.66 (3)    Behavior: 1.33 (3)                OTA: 2.30*

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

*Unable to read all overall trait marks.

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

GENERAL UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS/MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-146, formerly 3630620.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

970620:  Alcohol Screening Report indicates Applicant was referred for an ETOH and drug (THC) screening by her command due to her self disclosures. Applicant appears to meet DSM-IV criteria for ETOH dependence and DSM-IV criteria for THC (Cannabis) dependence. Recommend for Intensive Outpatient treatment for ETOH and THC (Cannabis) dependence, upon completion of treatment return to full duty. Recommended treatment at Point Loma, San Diego, CA treatment facility.

970630:  DAAR indicates Applicant was found dependent, amenable and eligible, recommended for Level III Treatment.
970825:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92: (2 Specifications) Did on or about April 1997 and June through 12 June 1997, violate a lawful general regulation, Article 1138, U.S. Navy Regulations dated 14 September 1990, by wrongfully using and possessing controlled substances, violation of UCMJ, Article 112a: (2 Specifications) Did on or about June 1 through 12 June 1997 wrongfully use and posses and unknown quantity of Lysergic Acid Diethylamide (LSD), a controlled substance, violation of UCMJ, Article 134: Did on or about June 1 through 12 June 1997, as a result of wrongful previous overindulgence in drugs, was incapacitated for the proper performance of her duties.
         Award: Forfeiture of $505.00 pay per month for 2 months, restriction to CFAY for 45 days, extra duty for 45 days, reduction to next inferior pay grade. Appealed.

970825:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse as evidenced by all drug incidents in your current enlistment.
970904:  Applicant advised of her rights and having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to appear before an Administrative Discharge Board.

970910:  Appeal denied.

 970924:  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.

971017:  Commanding Officer recommended discharge general under honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse (use). Commanding Officer’s comments (verbatim): [RMSA B_ (Applicant) does not qualify for continued service in the Navy based on her admitted and documented use of illegal drugs. RMSA B_ (Applicant) conduct and behavior are prejudicial to good order and discipline. She has demonstrated an inability to conform to the absolute minimum standards required of each and every service member. She will be separated under general conditions by Personnel Support Detachment Point Loma, CA after completion or failure to complete Level III treatment for alcohol and drug dependency.]

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 971215 with a characterization of general under 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: 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. While she may feel that her addiction was a contributing factor, it does not mitigate the Applicant’s misconduct. A characterization of service of general (under honorable) conditions is warranted when the member’s conduct constitutes a departure from that expected of a Sailor. The Applicant’s service was marred by award of nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for illegal drug use. The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of her service, reflects her disobedience of the orders and directives which regulate good order and discipline in the naval service, and falls short of that required for an honorable characterization of service. An upgrade to honorable would be inappropriate. Relief denied. For the Applicant’s edification, Sailors guilty of illegal drug use normally receive a discharge characterization of under other than honorable conditions.

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 credible evidence that the Applicant is living a drug free life style, are examples of verifiable documents that should be provided to receive consideration for relief, based on post-service conduct. At this time, the Applicant has not provided sufficient verifiable documentation of good character and conduct to mitigate her misconduct while on active duty. Relief denied.

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. 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 . 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 " 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 | 2000_Navy | ND00-01081

    Original file (ND00-01081.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 issue 1, the Board found that the applicant had a positive urinalysis for THC on 2 separate occasions, which he knew to be in violation of the UCMJ. Although the applicant may feel he is a “good person” and “worthy of an upgrade,” his actions while in the service make him deserving of an other...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00773

    Original file (ND00-00773.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00773 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000605, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. Officers of the Naval Discharge Review Board; I am respectfully submitting this request to have my Discharge upgraded from Other Than Honorable to General Under Honorable Conditions. Again on 84Jan13, SNM was warned and counseled about her misconduct with a third page 13 counseling/warning...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600650

    Original file (ND0600650.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests that the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable and the Narrative Reason for Separation be changed to “ Hardship. The summary of service clearly documents that misconduct due to drug abuse was the reason the Applicant was discharged. Equity – Youth and immaturity: The Applicant contends that the discharge was improper due to her age, her separation from her family, and that she did not know how to deal with the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-01027

    Original file (ND99-01027.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 Copy of Evaluation Report and Counseling Record for 97Mar01 to 97Jun03 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: USNR (DEP) 960112 - 960314 ELS USNR (DEP) 960318 - 960319 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 960320 Date of Discharge: 980515 Length of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01411

    Original file (ND03-01411.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. As the representative, we ask that consideration be given to equitable relief, as this is a matter that involves a determination whether a discharge should be changed under the equity standards, to include any issue upon which the Applicant submits to the Board’s discretionary authority, under SECNAVIST 5420.174C.Under the premises of equitable relief,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00460

    Original file (ND01-00460.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-ADAN, USN Docket No. ND01-00460 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010301, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00304

    Original file (ND01-00304.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :840716: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 134: Wrongful use of a controlled substance, to wit: marijuana on 12Jun84. After a thorough review of the records, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper and equitable (C and D).In response to the applicant’s issue, the applicant states she is deserving of an upgrade to her discharge because of her hard work both while in the Navy and as a...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00730

    Original file (ND02-00730.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Please help me Review Board with a Second Change. Commanding Officer recommended separate from service.880623: Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse (use).Commanding Officer’s comments (verbatim): [SNM signed page 13 counseling him on the Navy's policy toward drug abuse 27Apr 87. After a complete review of the record, including the evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board determined that the...

  • 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 | 2000_Navy | ND00-01016

    Original file (ND00-01016.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).The applicant states in issue 1 that “ the commanding officer of the USS Nimitz at the time did not hear my case from either myself or my legal officer.” The Board found nothing in the records, nor did the applicant provide anything to indicate or to show that there exists an error of fact, law, procedure, or...