Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00119
Original file (ND03-00119.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-EM3, USN
Docket No. ND03-00119

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 20021023, 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 20030926. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the Applicant’s service was discovered by the NDRB. 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. Use Brief, Page 1, Paragraph 3, Sentences 2, 3, and 6.

He has demonstrated a consistent maturity level of a senior first class petty officer ready to advance to Chief Petty Officer. Mr. (Applicant) has given over five solid years of dedicated Naval Service, a momentary lapse in judgment has cost him his career and he accepts that. After five hard years of exemplary service living our “Core values” Mr. (Applicant) deserves to be consider for a General Discharge.

2. My Discharge was inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident in 41 months of service onboard CVN-72.

3. My discharge was inequitable because is was based on one momentary lapse in judgment.

4. My discharge was inequitable because it does not justify the exemplary performance of my Naval Career.

 Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Applicant’s DD Form 214
Character reference, dated December 13, 2001

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     19960209 – 19960611      COG
         Active: None

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 19960612                      Date of Discharge: 20011222

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 05 06 11
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 17        Parental Consent         Years Contracted: 4 (24 months extension)
Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 75

 Highest Rate: EM2

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 4.00 (1)    Behavior: 4.00 (1)                OTA: 3.86

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: AFEM, MUC (3), CGUCR, SSDR (2)

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: 2

 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 :

970515:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Violate a lawful general regulation by wrongfully consuming an alcoholic beverage while under the age of twenty-one on 970510.
         Award: Forfeiture of $100 per month for 2 months, correctional custody for 30 days, reduction to EMFN. No indication of appeal in the record.
991201:  Applicant to unauthorized absence 0715, 991201.

991204:  Applicant from unauthorized absence 0700, 991204 (2 days/surrendered).

 011113:  NAVDRUGLAB, San Diego, CA, reported Applicant’s urine sample, received 011105, tested positive for cocaine.
011117:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 112A: Wrongful use of cocaine on 011028.
         Award: Forfeiture of $1053 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to EM3. No indication of appeal in the record.
011127:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense as evidenced by CO’s NJP on 971115 for violation of UCMJ, Article 92 and misconduct due to drug abuse as evidenced by wrongful use of cocaine on 011028.
011127:  Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights.
011214:  Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense and misconduct due to drug abuse (use).

011217:  COMCRUDSEGRU 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 20011222 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, 3 and 4. The Applicant referenced a statement from a reference letter submitted on his behalf that states the Applicant had a lapse in judgment after five years of exemplary service and deserves a General (under Honorable conditions) discharge.

The Applicant’s record shows that he had above average performance and behavior marks, however, the Applicant was guilty of drug abuse and an Other Than Honorable discharge is equitable for misconduct. The applicant’s Commanding Officer had the option of recommending a characterization of General (under Honorable conditions), but he did not. In regards to the Naval Discharge Review Board, n ormally, to permit relief, an error or inequity must have occurred during the period of enlistment in question. No errors or inequities were discovered in the execution of the Applicant’s discharge. The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. However, 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 the civilian life subsequent to leaving the service. Outstanding post-service conduct, 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 can be considered. Examples of documentation to forward to the Board include proof of educational pursuits, verifiable employment record(s), documentation of community service, certification of non-involvement with civil authorities, and credible evidence of a substance free lifestyle. At this time, the applicant has not provided sufficient documentation for the Board to consider. Therefore, no relief will be granted.

Issue 2. The Applicant states his discharge was based on one isolated incident in 41 months of service.

According to Navy regulations, drug abuse requires mandatory processing for separation. The discharge was proper and equitable. Relief denied.

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. 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 33, effective 16 Jul 2001 until 21 Aug 2002, 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 | 2001_Navy | ND01-00306

    Original file (ND01-00306.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00306 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010117, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. 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: USNR (DEP) 980909 - 990721 COG Period of Service...

  • 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 | 2004_Navy | ND04-00118

    Original file (ND04-00118.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, no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the Applicant’s service was discovered by the NDRB. Documentation In addition to the service record, ONLY PARTIAL DISCHARGE PACKAGE AVAILABLE, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00524

    Original file (ND03-00524.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Decision A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20040114. 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 issue is without merit.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01272

    Original file (ND03-01272.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-01272 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030728. In the acknowledgement letter, the Applicant was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing. As of this time, the Applicant has not provided any documentation for the Board to consider.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00273

    Original file (ND01-00273.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Character reference dated December 17, 2000 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: USNR (DEP) 931105 - 940530 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 940601 Date of Discharge: 980530 Length of Service (years, months, days): Active: 04 00 00 Inactive: None Age at Entry:...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00137

    Original file (ND04-00137.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) advised that the board first conduct a documentary record review prior to any personal appearance hearing. Appeal denied 030206.030214: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.030214: Applicant advised of rights and having consulted with...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01232

    Original file (ND03-01232.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-01232 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030715. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. The discharge shall remain: UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-146, formerly Article 3630620.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00678

    Original file (ND01-00678.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00678 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010417, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 001103, in absentia, under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to drug abuse (use) (A). Relief is denied.The applicant’s second issue states: “(Equity Issue)...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00731

    Original file (ND00-00731.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    990225: 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 retention. The final discharge authority was the Assistant Secretary of the Navy (Manpower and Reserve Affairs) who directed the applicant be discharged, but provided leniency by authorizing a general (under honorable conditions) characterization. At this...