Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00207
Original file (ND03-00207.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-AR, USN
Docket No. ND03-00207

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 20021121, 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/PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-140 (formerly 3630600).

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as submitted

1.       I am writing this summary to request an upgrade of my discharge from other than
 honorable” to” general under honorable conditions”. Please review the following issues to support my request to upgrade my discharge to “general under honorable conditions”.

I was discharged from the US Navy for unauthorized absence and failing a random drug screen. Since my separation from the armed forces, I have attended and completed an in-patient drug treatment program and now attend AA meetings regularly. As a result, I have been clean and sober for some time now.

The reason I request an upgrade is for possible reenlistment into the active branch of the US Navy. Also for possible future employment for civil service jobs or other federal, state or government jobs.

Thank you for your time and attention to this matter.

Sincerely,
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)     981019 – 981214  COG
         Active: None

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 981215               Date of Discharge: 990813

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 00 07 09
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 23                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 10                        AFQT: 49

 Highest Rate: AR

 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: 14

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-140 (formerly 3630600).

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

990330:  NAVDRUGLAB, GREAT LAKES, IL, reported applicant’s urine sample, received 990325, tested positive for THC and cocaine.




990421:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized Absence 14 days.
         Award: Forfeiture of $450 per month for 1 month, restriction and extra duty for 30 days. No indication of appeal in the record.

990421:  Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (Unauthorized Absence), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

990719:  NAVDRUGLAB, JACKSONVILLE, FL, reported applicant’s urine sample, received 990712, tested positive for THC.

 990727:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 112A (3 specs): (1) Wrongful use of an undetermined amount of cocaine as confirmed in urinalysis testing by Naval Drug Laboratory, Great Lakes, Illinois, dated 990330; (2) Wrongful use of undetermined amount of marijuana as confirmed in urinalysis testing by Naval Drug Laboratory, Great Lakes, Illinois, dated 990330; (3) Wrongful use of an undetermined amount of marijuana as confirmed in urinalysis testing by Naval Drug Laboratory, Jacksonville, Florida, dated 990719.
         Award: Forfeiture of $450 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days. No indication of appeal in the record.
        
970729:  Chronological Record of Medical Care entry from Recruit Training Facility – NAS Florida: Chart reviewed, patient interviewed. Concur with diagnosis of drug abuse and recommend patient not put into treatment. No risk for withdrawal.

990806:  Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct, and drug abuse.

990806:  Chief of Naval Education and Training directed the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.

         Partial discharge package missing.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 19990813 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct (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).

In the Applicant’s issue 1, the Board found : T here 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 re-characterization 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, a drug-free lifestyle, and certification of community service and non-involvement with civil authorities are examples of verifiable proof that can be submitted. The Board appreciates the Applicant’s efforts to improve his life and his involvement in regularly attended AA meetings and encourages him to continue his participation. At this time, the Applicant has not provided sufficient verifiable documentation of good character and conduct to mitigate his misconduct while on active duty. Relief is not warranted.
 
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. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 18, effective
12 Dec 1997 until 21 Aug 2002, Article 1910-140 (formerly 3630600), SEPARATION BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT - PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT.

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 | ND00-00107

    Original file (ND00-00107.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00107 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 991027, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. I have also had numerous treatments for alcoholism, in the service and since being separated. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 Illinois Treatment Verification Applicant's...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500590

    Original file (ND0500590.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. As of this time, the Applicant’s post-service conduct has been insufficient to mitigate his misconduct while in the Naval service. 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:Secretary of the Navy Council of Review Boards

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00441

    Original file (ND02-00441.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Sincerely Documentation In addition to the service record (medical record not available to the Board), 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) 990910 - 991005 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 991006 Date of Discharge: 000928 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 00 11 13 Inactive: None ...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00657

    Original file (ND00-00657.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00657 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000427, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 990211 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct (A). However, the Board is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500463

    Original file (ND0500463.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. 001006: Commanding Officer, Service School Command, Great Lakes, IL recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense and misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. Outstanding post-service conduct, to the extent that such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the Applicant’s...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00297

    Original file (ND01-00297.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: USNR (DEP) 941017 - 950621 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 950622 Date of Discharge: 990614 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 03 11 23 Inactive: None OSSN (applicant) surrendered himself on...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-01129

    Original file (ND99-01129.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    980924: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct as evidenced by violation of UCMJ Article 86 (Unauthorized Absence) on 2 April 1998, Article 86 (Unauthorized absence) and Article 87 (Missing Movement) on 18 June 1998, and Article 86 (Unauthorized absence) on 19 September 1998.980924: Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-01164

    Original file (ND01-01164.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-SN, USN Docket No. The Applicant did not provide any of these documents. He 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.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-01164 (2)

    Original file (ND01-01164 (2).rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-SN, USN Docket No. The Applicant did not provide any of these documents. He 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.

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00501

    Original file (ND99-00501.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 response to the applicant’s issue, the Board has to presume regularity in the conduct of government affairs. The applicant also did not provide any post-service documentation for the Board to consider. Outstanding post-service conduct, to the extent that such matters provide a basis for a more thorough...