Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-01288
Original file (ND02-01288.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-ISSA, USN
Docket No. ND02-01288

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 020911, 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 list any representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 030722. 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. The discharge I received was in accordance with my actions.

2. The improper handling of my situation by the command previous to my discharge .

3. To change my RE-4 to an RE-3 so that I may reenlist and complete my duty.

4. My discharge was in accordance with my actions. However, the events that lead to my actions and the way the command handled my situation are in question.
Once I arrived on the USS CARL VINSON CVN-70, I soon was not able to sleep and was claustrphobic. I complained to my command and was sent to the ship's psychiatrist. I was told to "relax" and "try to get over these problems". When that didn't work, I went to see the chaplain. I was told to see the officer in charge of medical. Did and he informed me that I was depressed and I was put on medication. My failure to adapt to ship life was over-looked as "complaining". I also went to the naval hospital in Bermington. There I was told that I would not receive a transfer and to "deal with my problems."
All my attempts to receive help failed. At this point, I made the decision to get out of the Navy. It was the wrong decision. All I had worked for was gone.
I want to be able to reenlist. I wish for the review board to change my RE-4 to an RE-3. I wish to give the time I owe. I was wrong for my actions, but only the review board can allow me the chance to make my wrong a right.
I ask for the mercy of the review board!

 Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Applicant 's DD Form 214 (Member 4)
History of Assignments
Certificate of completion, dated May 12, 2000
Record of counseling, dated May 10, 2000
Administrative Remarks, dated April 26, 2000
Award page from Applicant 's service record

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     990831 - 991006  COG
         Active: None

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 991007               Date of Discharge: 010302

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 01 04 26
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 24                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 71

 Highest Rate: ISSN

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 1.00 (1)    Behavior: 2.00 (2)                OTA: 2.00

 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 1910-146, formerly 3630620.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

000510:  Counseling: Advised of deficiency (personal behavior), notified of corrective actions and assistance available. [Extracted from supporting documents furnished by the Applicant .]

010108:  NAVDRUGLAB, San Diego, CA, reported Applicant ’ s urine sample, received 001229, tested positive for THC.

010119:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 112A: Wrongful use of marijuana.
         Award: Forfeiture of $584 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to ISSA. No indication of appeal in the record.
010119:  Applicant refused screening for drug dependency.

010119:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.
010119:  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.
010128:  Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse (use).

010131:  COMCARGRU THREE 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 010302 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).

 Issues 1-4. 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 record is devoid of evidence that the Applicant was not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions. Relief denied.
Concerning a change in reenlistment code, the NDRB has no authority to change reenlistment codes or make recommendations to permit reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Naval Service or any other branch of the Armed Forces. Neither a less than fully honorable discharge nor an unfavorable “RE” code is, in itself, a bar to reenlistment. A request for waiver is normally done only during the processing of a formal application for enlistment through a recruiter. Relief is therefore denied.

The Applicant’s discharge characterization accurately reflects his service to his 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 not warranted.

The Applicant 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. 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 31, dated 20 Feb 01, effective 12 Feb 2001 until 15 Jul 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 " 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 | 2003_Navy | ND03-00036

    Original file (ND03-00036.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 issues 1, 2, 3, and 4, the Board determined these issues have no merit. The Applicant was discharged for drug abuse. At this time, the applicant has not provided any documentation for the Board to consider.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00030

    Original file (ND04-00030.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-FA, USN Docket No. ND04-00030 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20031001. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant’s DD Form 214 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 010917 -...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00225

    Original file (ND04-00225.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND04-00225 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20031119. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01233

    Original file (ND03-01233.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-AR, USN Docket No. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Concerning reenlistment, the NDRB has no authority to change reenlistment codes or make recommendations to permit reentry into the naval service or any other of the Armed Forces.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00543

    Original file (ND03-00543.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. No indication of appeal in the record.010513: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse as evidenced by NAVDRUGLAB Jacksonville FL message 091807Z Mar 01 and your NJP of 010508.010514: Applicant advised of his rights and having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Article...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00698

    Original file (ND02-00698.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Memorial Award for Persistence, Initiative, and Motivation Physical Excellence Award Letter from Applicant dated May 14, 2001Applicant's DD Form 214 (Member 1) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 000325 - 000412 COG Active: None Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment:...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00691

    Original file (ND04-00691.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. 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 states his discharge was based on one isolated incident in “14 months and 28 days.” Despite a servicemember’s prior record of service, certain serious offenses, even though...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00549

    Original file (ND01-00549.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    980511: An Administrative Discharge Board, based upon a preponderance of the evidence and by unanimous vote, found that the applicant had committed misconduct due to commission of a serious offense and misconduct due to drug abuse, that the misconduct warranted separation, and recommended discharge general under honorable conditions. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00221

    Original file (ND03-00221.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-00221 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 20021113, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. 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: USNR (DEP) 010830 - 010925 COG Active:...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00382

    Original file (ND03-00382.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. Decision A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20031205. 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 states his discharge was based on one isolated incident in “38 months.”