Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00788
Original file (ND03-00788.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-SR, USN
Docket No. ND03-00788

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received 20030402. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable and the reason be change to Convenience to Government "A reenlistment code change to RE-1: corresponding separation program number designator. The Applicant requests 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. Subsequent to the application, the Applicant obtained representation by the American Legion.

Decision

A personal appearance hearing was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20040325. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the NDRB discerned no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the Applicant’s service at the time of his discharge. However, after consideration of the Applicant’s substantial post service accomplishments, charitable contributions, and good citizenship, the Board determined that partial relief was warranted on the basis of equity. The Board’s vote was three to two that the character of the discharge shall change and unanimous that the narrative reason for the discharge will remain the same. The discharge shall change to: GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/ Misconduct – Drug abuse, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630620.





PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

 Prior to commencing the hearing, the Applicant withdrew his issues listed on the DD Form 293 and his request to change the reason for discharge and reenlistment code.

Issues submitted by Applicant’s counsel/representative (American Legion ):
“ 1. (Equity Issue) This former member opines that youth and immaturity impaired his ability to serve and was a contributing factor in his misconduct of record.
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 this application.”
Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Character reference, dated November 12, 1999
Character reference, dated April 18, 2002
Character reference, dated October 12, 2001
Letter from Applicant’s wife, dated December 2, 2002
Letter from Applicant’s mother, dated December 5, 2002
Degree of Bachelor of Arts, dated August 30, 1996
Notice of The Dean’s Academic Honor List, dated February 28, 1996
CNU Alumni Society, Board of Directors Ballot (2 pages)
Member in good standing certificate, dated June 2000
Thank you letter from Gloucester-Mathews Humane Society, Inc., dated November 1, 2002
Certificate of appreciation, dated November 1, 2001
Assistant Coach of the Year Award, dated 1997-1998
Most Promising Certificate, dated April 19, 2000
Letter to Applicant from County of York, Virginia, dated March 11, 1998 with enclosed resolution
Thank you note
Thank you note
Thank you letter, dated January 18, 1996
Applicant’s DD Form 214 (2)
Forty-four pages from Applicant’s service record

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     890531 - 890814  COG
         Active: None

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 890815               Date of Discharge: 900607

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 00 09 23
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 19                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 52

 Highest Rate: SR

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: NOB*                          Behavior: NOB             OTA: NOB

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: None

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

*None obtained from the record

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/Misconduct – Drug abuse, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630620.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

900511:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 112A: Wrongfully use cocaine 900421-900423.
         Award: Forfeiture of $362.10 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days. No indication of appeal in the record.

900514:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.
900514:  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.
900522:  Medical evaluation for drug abuse found the Applicant to be an ETOH/drug abuser, not dependent.

900530:  Drug and Alcohol Abuse Report: Cocaine abuse, less than monthly. Random urinalysis 900501. DAPA recommended separation. Physician found Applicant not dependent and recommended Level I treatment. Commanding Officer recommended separation. Comments: SNM has no potential for further naval service. SNM is an average performer.
900601:  Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.

900605:  CNMPC 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 19900607 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).

 Issues 1 and 2: The Board found that the Applicant’s post-service conduct was sufficiently creditable to warrant an upgrade to his characterization of service to general (under honorable conditions). The Applicant’s career progression, charitable contributions, and strong references demonstrated that he possessed character and drive that was not evident during his tour of active duty. His post-service actions demonstrate that his illegal drug use was most likely an isolated event not reflective of his overall character. However, the Board found that the Applicant’s post-service conduct does not sufficiently mitigate his misconduct while on active duty to warrant full relief in the form of an honorable discharge. Therefore partial relief is granted.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

 A. Navy Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560A), Change 6, effective 11 Jan 89 until 13 Jun 90, 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 | 2001_Navy | ND01-00611

    Original file (ND01-00611.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Decision A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 011018. 851113: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by readcson of misconduct due to drug abuse as evidenced by your NJP for a positive urinalysis.851209: Applicant advised of his rights and having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to appear before an Administrative Discharge Board.860210: An Administrative Discharge Board,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01031

    Original file (ND03-01031.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to entry level separation or uncharacterized. Decision A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20040415. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Instruction for Completion of DD Form 293 Copy of DD Form 214 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00913

    Original file (ND04-00913.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 20041103. Navy Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 14, effective 03 Oct 96 until 11 Dec 97, Article 3630620 SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT - DRUG ABUSE.

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00969

    Original file (ND99-00969.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    890130: CAAC evaluation indicated applicant did not appear to be dependent on cocaine, or illicit drug or alcohol. There is no requirement or law that grants recharacterization solely on the issue of obtaining Veterans' benefits and this issue does not serve to provide a foundation upon which the Board can grant relief. Navy Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560A), Change 6, effective 11 Jan 89 until 13 Jun 90, Article 3630620, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED MEMBERS BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT DUE...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00497

    Original file (ND02-00497.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00497 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020308, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. The Applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00041

    Original file (ND02-00041.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 010112 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 discharge was proper and equitable (C and D).Issue 1 states: “Please consider that I do not have a drug problem it was just to get out of the navy because my dad owns...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00136

    Original file (ND00-00136.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-STGSR, USN Docket No. ND00-00136 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 991102, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01195

    Original file (ND03-01195.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-01195 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030702. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable, general/under honorable conditions and entry level separation or uncharacterized and the reason for the discharge be changed to “Convenience of Military”. Decision A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20040514.

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00596

    Original file (ND99-00596.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 960328 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 discharge was proper and equitable (C and D).In response to the applicant’s issue 1, the Board found that the applicant would not be eligible for the GI Bill, having...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-01099

    Original file (ND99-01099.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 introduced no decisional issues for consideration by the Board. 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...