Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00913
Original file (ND03-00913.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-FR, USNR
Docket No. ND03-00913

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20030502. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. The Applicant requests a personal appearance hearing discharge review before a traveling panel closest to Ocala, FL. The Applicant did not list any representative on the DD Form 293. In the acknowledgement letter to the applicant, he was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) does not travel, all hearing are held in the Washington, DC Area. The Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) also advised that the board first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20040401. 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 – commission of a serious offense, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

 No issues were submitted by the Applicant.

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):
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     None
         Active: USN                        None

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 901117               Date of Discharge: 921014

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 01 09 01
         Inactive: 00 01 27

 Age at Entry: 20                          Years Contracted: 8 (6 months extension)

Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 38

 Highest Rate: FA

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.50 (2)    Behavior: 3.10 (2)                OTA : 3.50

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: JMU, NDSM, SSDR

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/Misconduct – commission of a serious offense, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

910114:  Ordered to active duty for 24 months under the Seaman Apprenticeship program

911113:  Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (Larceny), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

911113:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 121: Larceny, violation of UCMJ, Article 134: Disorderly conduct.
         Award: Forfeiture of $50.00 pay per month for 1 month. No indication of appeal in the record.

920716:  NAVDRUGLAB [Oakland, CA], reported Applicant’s urine sample, received 920708, tested positive for [THC].

920721:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 112a: Wrongful use of a controlled substance.
         Award: Forfeiture of $363.00 pay per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to E-1. No indication of appeal in the record.

920723:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense evidenced by all punishments under the UCMJ in your current enlistment, and misconduct due to drug abuse as evidenced by all drug incidents in your current enlistment.
920729:  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.
920821:  Medical evaluation for drug abuse found no evidence of drug dependency
920904:  Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense and misconduct due to drug abuse.

920928:  BUPERS directed the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 19921014 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (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).

 The Applicant did not introduce any decisional issues for the Board’s consideration. A characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions is warranted when the member’s conduct constitutes a significant departure from that expected of a Sailor. The Applicant’s service was marred by award of nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for illegal drug use. The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, falls short of that required for a general (under honorable conditions) characterization of service. Relief denied.

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. Evidence of continuing educational pursuits, a positive employment record, a drug-free lifestyle, and certification of community service and non-involvement with civil authorities are examples of verifiable proof that can be submitted.

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. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), effective 15 Aug 91 until
04 Mar 93, Article 3630600, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT – COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE.

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 | 1999_Navy | ND99-00849

    Original file (ND99-00849.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    No indication of appeal in the record.930202: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 134: Drinking on restriction on 1Feb93. No indication of appeal in the record.930202: USS WICHITA (AOR-11) notified applicant of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct as evidenced by NJP's of 23Oc91, 13Nov91, 11Sep92, 28Dec92 and 2Feb93 and misconduct due to commission of a serious offense as evidenced by wrongful use...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01009

    Original file (ND03-01009.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-01009 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030516. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. 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.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00590

    Original file (ND01-00590.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION 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 (D and E).Issue 1. The Board considers this a none decisional issue.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00079

    Original file (ND00-00079.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    [A93.08] Once again, as I've listed above, the death of my mother was impairing any clear thought process.5. At this time the applicant has not provided sufficient documentation of good character and conduct. 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.In response to applicant’s issues 4 and 5, while the Board sympathizes with the applicant, the loss of his mother does not exculpate the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00981

    Original file (ND02-00981.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    920601: Applicant to unauthorized absence 0700, 920601.920617: Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense. I recommend that he be discharged from the Navy under other than honorable conditions.920626: BUPERS directed the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense. The Applicant did not submit any...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01175

    Original file (ND03-01175.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. 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. You may view DoD Directive 1332.28 and other Decisional Documents by going online at " afls14.jag.af.mil ".The names, and...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00920

    Original file (ND99-00920.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND99-00920 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 990630, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. No indication of appeal in the record.940324: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.940325: Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00003

    Original file (ND01-00003.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Drug History: Denies any previous 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).The applicant’s issue states: “I was discharged appx 3 months after serving 45 days/ 45 days restricted duty 1/2 months pay for 2 months and reduction in rate from an E-5 to an E-1 this was the first offense I was charged with which I was found guilty. I feel with these...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00354

    Original file (ND99-00354.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. Applicant’s letter dated 981130 Copies of Applicant’s service record (previously held by the NDRB) Copy of letter and enclosure to the applicant from GEICO Insurance dated 940614 Copy of GED and associated scores PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 921125 -...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00418

    Original file (ND99-00418.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION There was nothing in the records, nor did the applicant provide any documentation, to indicate there existed an error of fact, law, procedure, or discretion at the time of discharge. At this time the applicant has not provided sufficient documentation of good character and conduct.