Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00579
Original file (ND03-00579.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-AA, USN
Docket No. ND03-00579

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20030221. 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 did not list any representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20040128. 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 3630620.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

 Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

“1. My discharge was inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident in 2 years 11 months of service with no Rehab offered to me until all out processed paper work was signed, Rehab should have been offered at my Captains Mass.”
Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Copies of DD Form 214 (2)
Specimen Results Certificate (5 pages)

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     911210 - 920412  COG
         Active: USN                        None

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 920413               Date of Discharge: 950307

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 02 10 18
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 23                          Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 09                        AFQT: 35

 Highest Rate: AN
Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.66 (3)    Behavior: 3.73 (3)                OTA: 3.67

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: Navy ”E”, NDSM, AFEM, SSDR, Expert Pistol Shot Medal

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: 7

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630620.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

941020:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: UA from unit from 941006 until 941013 (7 days/S).
Award: Forfeiture of $511.00 pay per month for 1 month, and oral reprimand. No indication of appeal in the record.
950202:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 112a: Wrongful use of methamphetamines.
         Award: Forfeiture of $478.00 pay per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to E-2. No indication of appeal in the record.
950202:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse as evidenced by the wrongful use of methamphetamines.
950202:  Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights.

950207:  Applicant reported to medical escorted by Master-at-Arms. Patient stated “I would like to kill myself so I don’t have to deal with my problems, I wish they were over with.” Patient was currently on restriction with pending charges of theft. Patient dismayed due to theft charges still pending and Division Officer telling entire division why he did crystal meth (to get out of navy). Patient is dismayed with navy and feels people in division don’t like him for position he holds.

950214:  Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.

950224:  To confinement.

950226:  Released from confinement and restored to full duty.

950301:  Medical evaluation found the Applicant to be not drug or alcohol dependent.

950301:  BUPERS directed the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 19950307 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to drug abuse (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. Even one instance of drug abuse warranted processing for separation. Separation under these conditions generally results in characterization of service under other than honorable conditions. The Applicant was evaluated for drug dependency and found not dependent. Therefore, no rehabilitation treatment was offered. 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), Change 9/94, effective
22 Jul 94 until 02 Oct 96, 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 | 2000_Navy | ND00-00247

    Original file (ND00-00247.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. Relief denied.The applicant’s second issue states: “I no longer wanted to be in the US Navy. As I soon found out, that was not true.” The NDRB found the applicant was discharged for misconduct based on his admitted drug use.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00057

    Original file (ND02-00057.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    To: Navy Discharge Review Board, I am honorably requesting an upgrade in my discharge status. 950328: 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 by a vote of 2 to 1, recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions. Despite the applicant’s excellent performance evaluations, her drug abuse warranted processing...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00263

    Original file (ND00-00263.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Pt instructed to stop drinking.950120: Applicant to unauthorized absence 0700, 20Jan95. At that time the hospital staff did not know that the patient’s command had received discharge authority with a separation date of 29 Apr 95 and had arranged for him to be separated with an Other Than Honorable discharge. Under the Manual for Courts-Martial, a punitive discharge is authorized for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Article 86, for unauthorized absence for a period in...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00115

    Original file (ND02-00115.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    No indication of appeal in the record.890828: 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 summary court martial dated 26 July 1989 with convictions of 2 extensive periods of unauthorized absence including missing ship's movement and NJP dated 25 August 1989 for usage of a controlled substance (methamphetamine/amphetamines), misconduct due to drug abuse as...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00583

    Original file (ND99-00583.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 the applicant’s issue 1, the Board determined this issue is without merit. The NDRB reviews the propriety (did the Navy follow its own rules in processing the applicant for discharge) and equity (did the applicant receive a discharge characterization in keeping with Navy guidance or was the characterization...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-01050

    Original file (ND00-01050.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The discharge shall remain: UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/MISCONDUCT – Drug abuse (Use), authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630620. The only documents the applicant provided were copies of his service record, which do not justify an upgrade to his discharge. 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.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00733

    Original file (ND03-00733.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    941104: NAVDRUGLAB, San Diego, CA, reported Applicant’s urine sample, received 941031, tested positive for [Methamphetamine].941110: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 112a: Wrongful use of methamphetamine.Award: Forfeiture of $416.00 pay per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to E-1. Issue 1: The Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing career opportunities as requested in the issue. Navy Military Personnel Manual,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00554

    Original file (ND04-00554.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Decision A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20040922. “Under the explanation, at the time of my discharge, I was told there would be a good chance to upgrade the discharge to “General” providing that I began to set an example and became a model citizen. I would also like to have my discharge reviewed so I can continue to become and play an important role in my community through programs like the Constable Citizen Police Academy and numerous other youth...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00283

    Original file (ND00-00283.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00283 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000103, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. Age at Entry: 18 Years Contracted: 4 (24 months extension) Education Level: 12 AFQT: 79 Highest Rate: ET3 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks): Performance: 3.70 (2) Behavior: 3.70 (2) OTA: 3.80 Military Decorations: None...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00592

    Original file (ND04-00592.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 20041001. 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.