Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00220
Original file (ND03-00220.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-HT2 (SW), USN
Docket No. ND03-00220

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 20031017. 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 stated

 Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

“1. I apologize for my misconduct that got me an other than honorable discharge from the Navy. My action surely did not illustrate the person that I am. As you read on my evals I demonstrated that I was and is a hard worker and professional person. I consistently made time to enroll in the Navy’s outstanding afloat college program and was successful in it.

Truly it was depression cause from marital problems that motivated me to do what I did to get discharged. However, I do understand that it was unlawful and that I broke the UCMJ. In addition, I broke the Navy’s core value that I sworn on oath to serve out.

I humbly ask the board to upgrade the character of my service. Although I made a mistake in my Navy career that cause me to get an dishonorable discharge, I assure you that you will not be making one in upgrading the character of my discharged.

Once again, I apologize for my uncharacter behavior while serving in the greatest Navy in the world.”

 Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Copy of DD Form 214
Copies of Evaluation Report & Counseling Record (7 pages)
Copy of Grade Report from Central Texas College (4 pages)

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     970115 - 970216  COG
         Active: USN                        970217 - 001001  HON

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 001002               Date of Discharge: 020214

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 01 04 10
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 23                          Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 33

 Highest Rate: HT2

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 4.00 (3)    Behavior: 3.00 (3)                OTA: 3.50 (5.0 Evals)

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: AFSM, SSDR(2), GCM, NAVY”E”(3)

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: 18

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 :

001002:  Reenlisted onboard USS MITSCHER (DDG-57) for 4 years.

010830:  To UA [Extracted from DD 214].

 010918:  From UA (18 days) [Extracted from DD 214].

010928:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence, violation of UCMJ, Article 112a: Wrongful use and possession of marijuana.
Award: Reduction to E-4, forfeiture of $850.00 per month for two months, 45 days restriction. Not appealed.
011214:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.
011214:  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.
020116:  Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse (use). Commanding Officer’s comments: “On 28 September 2001, member was found guilty at CO’s NJP for violation of the UCMJ, Article 112a, wrongful use of marijuana and Article 86, unauthorized absence. Upon HT3 M_’s return from his UA status, he was advised of his rights and made an admission that while UA he had wrongfully used marijuana and that he knew that such use was wrongful. Based on the aforementioned information and the seriousness of the offense, he has no further potential in the U.S. Navy and therefore, I recommend that he is separated from the Naval service and the characterization of service be Under Other Than Honorable.”

020124:  Commander, Navy Region, Mid-Atlantic authorized 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 20020214 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 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.
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 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 | 2002_Navy | ND02-00323

    Original file (ND02-00323.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00323 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020129, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable or 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 Copy of letter from Department of Veterans Affairs dated April 18, 2001 Nine pages from applicant's service record PART II -...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-01083

    Original file (ND01-01083.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-01083 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010813, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to 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 equitable (C and D).Issue 1 states that the applicant used illegal drugs once, he fully understood the navy’s zero tolerance policy...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00629

    Original file (ND03-00629.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. 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, also advised that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) does not travel, and that all hearings are held in the Washington, D.C. area. Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00193

    Original file (ND02-00193.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00193 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020102, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The NDRB also advised the Applicant that the Board first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing. The NDRB requested the Applicant provide pertinent documentation to the Board for review, if available.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00776

    Original file (ND01-00776.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Decision A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 011214. 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. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00860

    Original file (ND03-00860.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-00860 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030424. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions. The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00816

    Original file (ND01-00816.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’s issue 1 states that his discharge was unjust. The Board found no injustice in the discharge. 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 | 2002_Navy | ND02-00991

    Original file (ND02-00991.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :001006: NAVDRUGLAB Jacksonville urinalysis report indicates Applicant tested positive for THC.010308: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug...

  • 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 | 2001_Navy | ND01-01076

    Original file (ND01-01076.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Decision A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 020419. Documentation Only the service and medical records were reviewed, as the applicant did not provide additional documentation for the Board to consider. The Board found that the applicant’s issue of being falsely accused of stealing a car was not pertinent to the offenses of desertion during the period of February-June 2000 or illegal drug use.