Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00799
Original file (ND03-00799.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-AR, USN
Docket No. ND03-00799

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20030402. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. 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 20040303. 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 1910-146, formerly Article 3630620.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

 Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

 1. “Dear Naval Council of Personnel Boards,

I would like to start by apologizing for the incident that led to my discharge. I was discharged for wrongful use of a controlled substance (marijuana). I know this was something impermissible and I cannot explain why I did this. All I can say is that I chose to be around the wrong crowd and I made a very regretful decision in my life. Due to this regretful and shameful discharge a window of opportunities in the future will close. Unfortunately you cannot dwell back into the past to do things differently, therefore this incident has served me to make wiser decisions and analyze circumstances before I lead myself to drastic consequences.

The Navy has made a very positive impact in my life. Although I regret that I am no longer a Navy recruit I still strive to be the best by utilizing what the Navy instilled in me forever which is Honor, Courage and Commitment. I sincerely ask that you please reconsider the, “other than dishonorable discharge.” This was the only incident I had since the time my service started until I was discharged and I strongly fell that it was very extreme.

What ever decision is reached by the Council I will respect. Again all I ask is that you please reevaluate the matter. You may contact me at the above address or phone numbers. Your time and consideration is greatly appreciated.

Cordially,

J_ M_ ( Applicant )”

 Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Applicant’s DD Form 214 (Member 1 and 4)
One hundred and fifteen pages from Applicant’s service record

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     001020 - 001204  COG
         Active: None

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 001205               Date of Discharge: 020531

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 01 05 27
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 20                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 36

 Highest Rate: AA

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.00 (1)    Behavior: 1.00 (1)                OTA: 2.67

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: None

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: 2

 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 :

020131:  NAVDRUGLAB, Jacksonville. FL reported Applicant’s urine sample, received 020125, tested positive for THC.

020207:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence on 0700, 020204 to 0614, 020207 (2 days/surrendered), violation of UCMJ, Article 112A: Wrongful use of marijuana on 020125.
         Award: Forfeiture of $577.75 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to AR. No indication of appeal in the record.
020220:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.
020220:  Applicant advised of rights and having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to appear before an Administrative Discharge Board.
020412:  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.

020415:  Medical evaluation for drug abuse found the Applicant to be a polysubstance dependent. Recommend Level III.

020429:  Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse (use).

020523:  Commander, Amphibious Group TWO directed the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse (use).

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 20020531 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. Mandatory processing for separation is required for sailors who abuse illegal drugs. Separation under these conditions generally results in characterization of service under other than honorable conditions. The evidence of record does not demonstrate that the Applicant was not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions. Relief denied.

The following is provided for the edification of the applicant. 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 naval service. The NDRB is authorized, however, to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge to the extent such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review. Examples of documentation that should be provided to the Board include proof of educational pursuits, verifiable employment records, documentation of community service, and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities.

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 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 33, effective 16 Jul 2001 until 21 Aug 2002, 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 | 2003_Navy | ND03-01303

    Original file (ND03-01303.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. 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. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00144

    Original file (ND04-00144.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION _______________________________________________________________________ In accordance with 32 C.F.R., section 724.166, and SECNAVINST 5420.174C, enclosure (1), paragraph 1.16, The American Legion submits to the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB or Board) the above issue and following statement in supplement to the Applicant’s...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01375

    Original file (ND03-01375.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-01375 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030813. The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review. Issue 1: Mandatory processing for separation is required for sailors who abuse illegal drugs.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00524

    Original file (ND03-00524.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 20040114. 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’s issue is without merit.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00850

    Original file (ND04-00850.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged, in absentia, on 20020228 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to drug abuse (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).Issues 1-5: The Applicant states his discharge was based on one isolated incident in “2.5 years of military...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500012

    Original file (ND0500012.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. 020503: 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. The NDRB is authorized, however, to consider post-service factors in...

  • 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 | 1999_Navy | ND99-01027

    Original file (ND99-01027.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 Copy of Evaluation Report and Counseling Record for 97Mar01 to 97Jun03 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: USNR (DEP) 960112 - 960314 ELS USNR (DEP) 960318 - 960319 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 960320 Date of Discharge: 980515 Length of...

  • 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 | ND99-00560

    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...