Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00247
Original file (ND03-00247.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-MSSN, USN
Docket No. ND03-00247

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 20021125, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The Applicant requested a personal appearance hearing before the board in the Washington National Capital Region. The Applicant did not list any representative on the DD Form 293. 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.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20031010. 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 – Drug abuse (Use), authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630620.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

 1. “To Whom it may concern I am asking to be reviewed by the board. So I can get a upgrade discharge. I realize now I had a illness called bipolar disorder that affected my ability to serve in the navy. I also realized I had it while I was in the navy.”

2. “My conduct and efficiency ratings/behavior and proficiency marks were mostly pretty good.”

3. “My record of promotions showed I was generally a good service member.”

4. “I have been a good citizen since discharge.”

5. “Personal problems impaired my ability to serve.”

6. “My use of drugs impaired my ability to serve.”

7. “My use of alcohol impaired my ability to serve.”

8. “Psychiatric problems I had impaired my ability to serve.”

 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)     881025 - 890111  COG
         Active: None

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 890112               Date of Discharge: 920504

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 03 03 23
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 20                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 12 2/3           AFQT: 29/32

 Highest Rate: MS3

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.70 (2)    Behavior: 3.70 (2)                OTA: 3.60

 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 – Drug abuse (Use), authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630620.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

890113:  Applicant briefed on Navy's policy of drug and alcohol abuse.
910522:  ARC returned Applicant to command as a misreferral as there was insufficient criteria to be diagnosed as alcohol dependent and he is therefore recommended for Level II treatment for alcohol abuse.

910711:  NAVDRUGLAB, Norfolk, VA, reported Applicant’s urine sample, received 910624, tested positive for cocaine.

910801:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 112A: Wrongful use of cocaine on 910619.
         Award: Forfeiture of $492 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to MSSN. No indication of appeal in the record.
910806:  DAPA and Medical Officer evaluation for drug abuse found the Applicant to be drug dependent on cocaine.

910806:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.
910828:  Applicant advised of his rights and having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to appear before an Administrative Discharge Board.
910913:  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 discharge under other than honorable conditions.

911024:  Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse (use).

911114:  BUPERS directed the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse (use).

911220:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence from 0630-1030, 911220.
         Award: Restriction for 3 days. No indication of appeal in the record.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 19920504 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 1-8. Administrative separation for misconduct takes precedence over possible separation for other reasons, such as a psychiatric condition. 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. Navy Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), effective 15 Aug 91 until 04 Mar 93, Article 3630620, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED MEMBERS BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT DUE TO 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 | 2005_Navy | ND0500213

    Original file (ND0500213.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. 890113: Applicant briefed on Navy’s policy of drug and alcohol abuse.890701: Applicant signed USN Drug Abuse Statement of Understanding. 910913: An Administrative Discharge Board, based upon 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 discharge...

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00637

    Original file (MD02-00637.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. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged on 920117 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to drug abuse (A). No other narrative reason other than that of misconduct for drug use more clearly describes the circumstances surrounding the Applicant’s processing for...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00504

    Original file (ND01-00504.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I were being consider for a medical review board. After a thorough review of the records, 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 found that a medical diagnosis on active duty or during post-service, and whether proper or improper, is not an issue upon which this Board can grant relief. At this time, the applicant has not provided any documentation of good character...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00267

    Original file (ND99-00267.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 980224 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to drug abuse (use) (A). After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the characterization of discharge was improper due to the applicant’s self-referral for drug use and shall be changed (C and D).The applicant introduced no decisional...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00686

    Original file (ND00-00686.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00686 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000504, 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 930922 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to drug abuse (use) (A). PART IV - INFORMATION FOR THE APPLICANT If you believe that the decision in your case is unclear,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00661

    Original file (ND00-00661.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) 860325 - 860330 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 860331 Date of Discharge: 860815 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 00 04 15 Inactive: None After a thorough review of the records,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00978

    Original file (ND01-00978.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00978 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010725, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. I had a prior Honorable Discharge, aswauth. Issue 1, the Board found that the rules and regulations applicable at the time of the Applicant's discharge provided that drug abuse alone can be relied on as the sole basis for a discharge under other than honorable conditions.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00452

    Original file (ND00-00452.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00452 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000224, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions. The applicant’s ninth issue states: “My ability to serve was impaired by my deprived background.” The NDRB found the applicant fully qualified for service at the time of enlistment. Relief is denied.The applicant’s tenth issue states: “Personal problems impaired my ability to...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00389

    Original file (ND01-00389.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    890119: 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 discharge under honorable conditions (general). In the applicant’s issue 2, the applicant states that he was brought to NJP for possession of a butterfly knife, which he explains “was a gift I brought in the Philipines on the way back on the ship.” The Board...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00374

    Original file (ND00-00374.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Decision A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 000824. 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 states: “During my fifteen years of service, I truly regret the mistake that I made. Navy Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560A), Change 6, effective 11 Jan 89 until 13 Jun 90, Article 3630620, SEPARATION...