Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01303
Original file (ND03-01303.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-GMSA, USN
Docket No. ND03-01303

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20030801. 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 the Board in the Washington National Capital Region. The Applicant did not list any representative on the DD Form 293. 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.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20040526. 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. “My reason for attempting to get a review of my discharge from the united states navy and hopefully an upgrade of my discharge is based on a couple of things. I was discharged under other than honorable conditions from the USS Arleigh Burke (DDG-51) on 02 April 2002 for misconduct. The charge was failing a urinalysis for THC (marijuana) in February 2002. The outcome of my NJP with Commander R_ R_ was a lowering rank from frocked third class petty officer to a seaman apprentice, forty-five days restriction, forty-five day extra duty, and 2 months at half months pay. Following that I received an other than honorable discharge. I enlisted in the United Stats Navy from Longview, Texas on 29 December 1999. From the time of enlistment until the time I failed the urinalysis (26 months) I had received no disciplinary actions. I had attended Gunner’s Mate “A” School and MK 41 VLS “C” School and served one Persian Gulf tour aboard the USS Arleigh Burke (DDG-51) with no instance of bad conduct or reprimands. I was the hardest worker in the workcenter and spent countless hours doing workcenter work, PQS training, and I was a member of the special security force. All of this can be checked on by my work center chief GMC (SW) R_ D_ and work center supervisor GM2 K_ M_ still serving aboard the USS Arleigh Burke (DDG-51). Since being discharged from the United States Navy, I have held a job and not been in any trouble. I am attempting to enroll in classes at West Georgia College in Georgia to further my education in the Fall of 2003. What I am trying to convey to the Board is that I had not been in any trouble during my military career up to my discharge and I have not been in any since some 15 months later. As a result of my good conduct I would like to have a review of my discharge to check my eligibility of upgrading it from an other than honorable discharge to general discharge so that I will not be hindered in finding a good job after I finish college. I want to thank the Board for taking the time to review my application and feel free to contact me if any additional information is needed or requested.”
Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
None

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     991220 - 991228  COG
         Active: USN                        None

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 991229               Date of Discharge: 020402

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 02 03 03
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 18                          Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 88

 Highest Rate: GMSN

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 2.50 (2)    Behavior: 2.50 (2)                OTA: 2.35*

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NAM, AFEM, SSDR, BATTLE”E”

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

 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 :

020201:  NAVDRUGLAB [Jacksonville, FL], reported Applicant’s urine sample, received 020125, tested positive for [THC].
020208:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 112A: Did on or about 020107, submit to a command authorized urinalysis on board USS ARLEIGH BURKE, and did test positive for tetrahydrocanabinol (THC), a known controlled substance.
         Award: Forfeiture of $619.00 pay per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to E-2. No indication of appeal in the record.
020213:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct commission of a serious offense as evidenced by all incidents in your current enlistment and misconduct due to drug abuse as evidenced by all drug incidents in your current enlistment.
020213:  Applicant advised of 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.
020220:  Commander, Destroyer Squadron TWO concurred with the recommendation of Commander, Cruiser Destroyer Group EIGHT for administrative separation

020313:  Commander, Cruiser-Destroyer Group EIGHT authorized 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 20020402 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: Regulations limit the Board’s review to a determination on the propriety and equity of the discharge. In the Applicant’s case, the Board could discern no impropriety or inequity and therefore considered his discharge proper and equitable. The Applicant states his discharge was based on one isolated incident in “26 months.” Despite a service member’s prior record of service, certain serious offenses, even though isolated, warrant separation from the naval service in order to maintain proper order and discipline. The Applicant’s service record is marred by award of nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for illegal drug use, thus substantiating the misconduct for which he was separated. Drug abuse warranted processing for separation, normally under other than honorable conditions. Additionally, the Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment opportunities as requested in the issue. 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. E vidence 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. At this time, the Board determined that the documentation submitted by the Applicant does not mitigate his misconduct while on active duty.

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 or any other evidence related to his discharge 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 | 2004_Navy | ND04-00382

    Original file (ND04-00382.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). The Veterans Administration determines eligibility for post-service benefits not the Navy Discharge Review Board. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700089

    Original file (ND0700089.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s service was marred by a civilian conviction which forms the basis for his administrative discharge and characterization of service. 20050527: Assistant Secretary of the Navy approves the Applicant’s discharge recommendation as General (under honorable condition) due to misconduct – civilian conviction.20050531: Commander, Navy Personnel Command directed Applicant’s discharge with a service characterization of general (under honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600282

    Original file (ND0600282.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. In addition, I believe that upon reviewing my record, you will see that my performance under my first Commanding Officers (CDR N.P. ” Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant’s DD Form 214 (Member 4 and Service 2)Three hundred and five pages, including duplicates, from...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00190

    Original file (ND01-00190.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-HTFN, USN Docket No. ND01-00190 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 001205, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501522

    Original file (ND0501522.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION No indication of appeal in the record.030801: Commanding Officer, USS COLE (DDG 67), recommended to Commander, Cruiser Destroyer Group TWELVE, that the Applicant be discharged under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00150

    Original file (ND04-00150.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. I strongly recommend that FR M_ (Applicant) be separated from the naval service by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse and that his characterization of service be Other Than Honorable. 001212: DD Form 214 issued: Applicant discharged under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse (use), authority MILPERSMAN 1910-146.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01119

    Original file (ND03-01119.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-01119 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030612. R_ W_ (Applicant)” 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.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501335

    Original file (ND0501335.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION This issue is without merit, relief not warranted.The NDRB is authorized 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. The Applicant provided no documentation as evidence of his post service conduct.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00505

    Original file (ND03-00505.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. “An inadequate discharge is of my concern, but I feel that I have and continued to better myself as a person. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-01051

    Original file (ND04-01051.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). I ask you to review the evidence and please change the conditions of my discharge.” 030109: Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.