Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00231
Original file (ND03-00231.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-FR, USN
Docket No. ND03-00231

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20021121. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review. The Applicant listed the American Legion as the representative on the DD Form 293.

 Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20031121. 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 3630600.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:
1. “Please consider changing my character of discharge and RE code for the reasons noted in the attached letter.”

 Comments submitted by Applicant’s counsel/representative (American Legion):

2. “ On behalf of the above referenced applicant, and in accordance with 32 C.F.R., section 724.166; SECNAVINST 5420.174C, enclosure (1), paragraph 1.16, The American Legion submits to the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB or Board) the following informal comments; and/or issue(s).

This former member was discharged Under Other Than Honorable Conditions due to misconduct as authorized by NAVMILPERSMAN, Art. 3630600.

Essentially, as noted on DD Form 293, this applicant is requesting that his discharge be upgraded because he never used drugs, only said he did to get discharged, and because of his post- service conduct. He has submitted 61 pages of additional documentation attesting to his hard work, educational pursuits, clean police record and employment history for consideration.

The SR reflects that SNFM was awarded NJP on 940317 for VUCMJ, Arts. 92, 112a. Following due process notifications, he was discharged for the misconduct on 940428.

Following review of the official Naval records, we opine that the issues raised on DD Form 293 amply advance this former member’s contentions and substantially reflect the probative facts needed for equitable review. Accordingly, we rest further comment on the evidence of record.

The American Legion’s express purpose in providing this statement, and any other submittals or opinions of record, is to aid the applicant in resolving any improprieties or inequities in the character and basis for discharge. Moreover, we rest assured that the Naval Discharge Review Board’s final decision will reflect sound equitable principles consistent in law, regulation, policy and discretion as promulgated by title 10 U.S.C., section 1553, and set forth in 32 C.F.R., part 724; SECNAVINST 5420.174C, enclosure (1).

This case is now respectfully submitted to the Board for deliberation and disposition. ”




Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Applicant’s DD Form 214 (3 copies)
Statement from Applicant (4 pages)
Letter from National Personnel Records Center to the Applicant, dated August 23, 2001
Twenty-eight pages from Applicant’s service record
Certificate from Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, dated March 31, 2002 (2 copies)
Letter from a Sergeant, City of Indianapolis, Police Department, dated July 2, 2002
Character reference dated February 29, 2001
Jobs maintained list (2 pages)
Schools attended
Welcome letter from International Union of Elevator Constructors, undated
Part II, The Landum-Griffin Act pages 28-48
Expense agreement, effective January 16, 1998
National Elevator Industry educational program
National Elevator Industry pension plan
National Elevator Industry health plan
Letter from National Elevator Industry, dated June 1, 1998
Quarterly working card, dated May 2002
Applicant’s driver’s license
Applicant’s social security card
Applicant’s license to carry weapon cards (3)
Applicant’s Armed Forces Identification card (front and back)
Applicant’s Armed Forces Liberty Pass (front and back)
JUPU One Card
Purdue University, Student of Technology at Indianapolis, Aeronautical Technology plan of study as of Spring 2001
Second semester 1999-2000 grade report information
Summer session 2000-2001 grade report information
First semester 2000-2001 grade report information
Second semester 2000-2001 grade report information
First semester 2001-2002 grade report information
Second semester 2001-2002 grade report information
Certificate of training, dated December 12, 2000
Official transcript from Ball State University
Ivy Tech State College, Spring 1999-2000
Student certificate statements, dated August 7, 2001, July 18, 2000, July 21, 1999,
Aviation Training Academy, dated November 1, 1995
Certificates of completion, dated November 1, 1995, May 31, 1995
Aviation Training Academy grade report (5 pages)
Purdue University, School of Technology at Indianapolis pamphlet
Letter from Purdue University, Office of Admissions, dated January 23, 2003
Police record check, dated December 31, 2002 (2 pages)
Certificate from Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, dated December 15, 2002

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     930108 - 931011  COG
         Active: None

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 931012               Date of Discharge: 940428

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 00 06 17
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 18                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 72

 Highest Rate: FA

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: NMA                  Behavior: NMA             OTA: NMA

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM

 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 3630600.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

940317:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 112A: Wrongful use of a controlled substance, to wit: marijuana, violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Failure to obey a lawful order.
         Award: Forfeiture of $416 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to FR. No indication of appeal in the record.
940325:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse and misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.
940325:  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.
940329:  Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse and misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.

940419:  BUPERS directed the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 19940428 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (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. 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.

The Applicant contends that he never used drugs and admitted usage for the sole purpose of obtaining a discharge from the Navy in order to return home to family and friends. The evidence of record did not show that the Applicant was either not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions. The NDRB recognizes that serving in the U.S. Navy is challenging. Our country is fortunate to have men and women willing to ensure the hardships and sacrifices required in order to serve their country. Your self-admission to drug use is considered as “wrongful use of a controlled substance” punishable under the UCMJ, Article 112a. The NRDB found that the Applicant’s service was equitably characterized. Relief denied.

Issue 2. The Board did consider the post-service documentation provided and recognizes the outstanding college transcripts and various training certificates obtained. While these documents demonstrate that the Applicant has made significant strides in establishing his credibility as a productive member of society these accomplishments do not mitigate the seriousness of his misconduct and therefore do not warrant recharacterization of his discharge. The discharge was proper and equitable. 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. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 5, effective
05 Mar 93 until 21 Jul 94, Article 3630600, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT – COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE.

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 | 1999_Navy | ND99-00920

    Original file (ND99-00920.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND99-00920 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 990630, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. No indication of appeal in the record.940324: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.940325: Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-01325

    Original file (ND02-01325.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-01325 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 20020917, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. Dear Counsel of Personnel Board:Applicant) and I am writing this letter to request an upgrade in discharge from a General (under honorable conditions) to an Honorable Discharge. Evidence of continuing educational pursuits, a positive employment record, documentation of community service, and certification of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00136

    Original file (ND04-00136.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION “Equity Issue: Based on our review of evidentiary record and on behalf of this former member, we request that the Board consider provisions of SECNAVINST 5420.174C, enclosure (1), Chapter 9, as it pertains to post-service conduct, in assessing the merits of this application. _________________________________________________________________ In accordance with 32 C.F.R., section 724.166, and SECNAVINST 5420.174C, enclosure (1), paragraph 1.16,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00880

    Original file (ND02-00880.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) also advised that the board first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing. 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 (D and E).Responding to the Applicant’s first issue, the NDRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an Applicant's discharge, will change the reason for...

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00155

    Original file (MD02-00155.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-Pvt, USMC Docket No. The only change from MCO P1900.16C is: “administrative” vice “admin”) GKK1 Misconduct-Drug abuse (with administrative discharge board)HKK1 Misconduct-Drug abuse (administrative discharge board required but waived) Characterization of service is written “HONORABLE”, “UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL)” or “UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS”( See page 1-33 of MCO...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00826

    Original file (ND01-00826.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In the acknowledgement letter to the applicant, he was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing. An employment record, documentation of community service, certification of non-involvement with civil authorities and proof drug /alcohol rehabilitation, if applicable, are examples of additional documents that should have been provided to receive consideration for relief, based on post-service conduct. ...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00582

    Original file (ND00-00582.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00582 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000410, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable or 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 (D and E).The applicant’s representative submitted the following as issue 1: (Equity Issue) As evidenced by his...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00746

    Original file (ND02-00746.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In the acknowledgement letter to the Applicant, the Applicant was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing. 940317: Special Court Martial Charge I: violation of the UCMJ, Article 86: Specification: Unauthorized absence from 0700, 930907 until 2228, 940209 (155 days/surrendered). At this time the Applicant has not provided sufficient documentation of good character and conduct to mitigate his...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00556

    Original file (ND02-00556.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00556 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020318, 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:Presentation from Applicant's attorney Thirty pages from Applicant's service record Personal statement from Applicant Post service accomplishment statement Recommendation for award dated...

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00787

    Original file (MD02-00787.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    (Listed on page 1-44of MCO P1900.16C, 4 Oct 82) THE CORRECT NARRATIVE REASON FOR SEPARATION FOR THE SEPARATION CODE JJC2 IS “As a result of a court-martial (SPCM)-Desertion”. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged on 890303 with a bad conduct discharge which was the sentence adjudged by a properly constituted special court-martial that was determined to be legal and proper, affirmed by appellate review authority and executed (A...