Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00664
Original file (ND03-00664.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-EMFN, USN
Docket No. ND03-00664

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20030305. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions and the reason for the discharge be changed to “single misconduct incident.” The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review. The Applicant did not list any representative on the DD Form 293. Subsequent to the application, the Applicant obtained representation from the American Legion.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20040205. 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 and reason for discharge was discovered by the NDRB. The Board’s vote was unanimous that the character of the discharge and narrative reason 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. “My discharge was inequitable because it was based on one incident in 58 months of service with no other adverse action. My offense occurred on leave over the New Years holiday. Due to my intoxication on New Years Eve, I do not even recall committing the offense. My offense was not committed while on my active duty post and did not affect my performance in the USN. If not for the one incident I would still be in the Navy serving my country. My other than honorable discharge has disgraced and haunted me. I would ask you to consider changing to under honorable conditions to reflect the almost five years of good conduct I worked hard to achieve in the Navy. Thank you for your time and consideration.”

Additional issues submitted by Applicant’s representative (American Legion):

“2. (Equity Issue) This former member further requests that the Board include provisions of SECNAVINST 5420.174C, enclosure (1), Chapter 9, as it pertains to post-service conduct, in assessing the merits of the application. ”

 Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Applicant’s DD Form 214

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     920529 - 930307  COG
         Active: None

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 930308               Date of Discharge: 980220

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 04 11 13
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 20                          Years Contracted: 4 (24 months extension)

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 84

 Highest Rate: EM3

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: NMF*                 Behavior: NMF             OTA: NMF

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: SSDR, AFSM (2), NDSM, GCM

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

* No Marks Found

 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 :

980115:  NAVDRUGLAB, Jacksonville, FL, reported Applicant’s urine sample, received 980112, tested positive for Tetrahydrocannabinol.

980211:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 112A: Wrongful use of a controlled substance between 971226 and 980105, to wit: marijuana.
         Award: Forfeiture of $300 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 30 days, reduction to EMFN. No indication of appeal in the record.
980213:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse as evidenced by your wrongful use of marijuana and misconduct due to commission of a serious offense as evidenced by your violation of UCMJ Article 112A: wrongful use of a controlled substance.
980213:  Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights.
980217:  Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse and by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.

980219:  COMLOGGRU TWO 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 19980220 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: The Applicant states his discharge was based on one isolated incident in “58 months.” To maintain proper order and discipline the military does not view isolated offenses as minor infractions even though the civilian world treats such offenses with leniency. The Applicant’s service record is marred by award of non-judicial punishment (NJP) for illegal drug use. Drug abuse warranted processing for separation, normally under other than honorable conditions. In the Applicant’s case, the Board could discern no impropriety or inequity and therefore considered his discharge proper and equitable. Relief is therefore denied.

Issue 2: 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. However, the NDRB is authorized to consider outstanding post-service factors in the recharacterization 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. E vidence of continuing educational pursuits, a positive employment record, an alcohol-free lifestyle, and certification of community service and non-involvement with civil authorities are examples of verifiable proof that can be submitted. At this time, the Board determined the Applicant has not submitted any documentation to mitigate his misconduct while on active duty. 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 . The Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 18, effective 12 Dec 97 to 19 May 99, 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 | ND02-00290

    Original file (ND02-00290.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. Sincerely Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 Twelve pages from applicant's service record Copy of applicant's social security card Letter from Commander, Navy Recruiting Area ONE, dated May 22, 1997 Education Evaluation request dated May 20, 1997 (with eight pages of supporting documents) PART II - SUMMARY OF...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00585

    Original file (ND03-00585.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Member was found non drug dependent.980213: Commander, Cruiser-Destroyer Group ONE directed the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse (use). 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00207

    Original file (ND00-00207.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    EVEN THOUGH I WAS NOT CONVICTED OF ANY TYPE OF DRUG OFFENSE IN THE MILITARY OR CIVILIAN LIFE I AM BRANDED WITH THIS STATEMENT THAT ONLY MY IMMEDIATE SUPERVISOR IN THE NAVY CHOSE TO DO, INSTEAD OF SENDING ME TO ALCOHOL AND DRUG ABUSE COUNSELING DUE TO THE ONLY FACT I HAD 10 TEN DAYS LEFT IN THE SERVICE, THIS WAS VERY UNFAIR AS I KNOW OTHERS THAT STAYED IN THE SERVICE AFTER GETTING A BAD UA TEST FOR DRUGS AND THEY WERE ALLOWED TO ATTEND COUNSELING HOWEVER THEY HAD TIME LEFT IN THE SERVICE SO...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00137

    Original file (ND04-00137.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) advised that the board first conduct a documentary record review prior to any personal appearance hearing. Appeal denied 030206.030214: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.030214: Applicant advised of rights and having consulted with...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00424

    Original file (ND00-00424.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    991021: 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 general (under honorable conditions). The attached documents along with my service record will that my general discharge should be upgraded.” The NDRB found the applicant’s issue without merit. After review of the applicant’s record the NDRB found,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00513

    Original file (ND99-00513.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND99-00513 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 990301, 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 980519 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to drug abuse (use) (A). The applicant’s first issue (equity) states the discharge authority did not consider his 33 months...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00949

    Original file (ND01-00949.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Naval Activities, Spain directed the applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse (use). 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. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00581

    Original file (ND99-00581.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND99-00581 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 990322, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. No indication of appeal in the record.980505: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 112a: wrongful use of a controlled substance.Award: Forfeiture of half a months pay per month for 2 month(s), restriction and extra duty for 45 days. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00560

    Original file (ND99-00560.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION There is no indication that the applicant turned himself in to the proper command representative or to a medical facility to qualify for self-referral amnesty. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00273

    Original file (ND01-00273.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Character reference dated December 17, 2000 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: USNR (DEP) 931105 - 940530 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 940601 Date of Discharge: 980530 Length of Service (years, months, days): Active: 04 00 00 Inactive: None Age at Entry:...