Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00996
Original file (ND04-00996.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-AEAA, USNR
Docket No. ND04-00996

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20040601. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The Applicant requests a personal appearance before the Board in the Washington National Capital Region. 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. The Applicant did not list any representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20041112. 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. “I believe that my discharge is unfair because it renders me ineligible to reenlist in time of war. The following issues are the reasons I believe my discharge should be upgraded to Honorable. It is said that when you’re discharged for the military with an – other than honorable – discharge, it would be hard to get a job at McDonald’s. Before I entered the military I didn’t know anything about electronics or computers. But the U.S. Navy opened and unlocked a hidden interest inside me. I was an aviation electrician in the U.S. Navy. The military gave me a reason to challenge my ways of thinking. It taught me that if I studied hard enough, I could learn anything in a short time. I applied that discipline to avionics. It was hard but I learned by doing things over and over again, I could brainwash myself into learning.
I believe that it was the depression of being away from home and the pressure of doing well at my A-schools that led to my drug use. During my transition from base to base, I was administered a urine test. Later, the results showed that had marijuana in my system. Instantly I felt that I let my family, my country and myself down. My work division was sorry to see me go because I made troubleshooting circuit cards look easy. I loved the opportunity the military gave me to attend different tech schools. I was discharged from the Navy for testing positive for marijuana. I realized I made a big mistake. Before my discharge, I’d gotten treatment at Norfolk. When I left the military my only desire was to find a way to get back into school.

When I got out of the service it was rough at first, but I enrolled myself in Job Corp because I heard they would give a 2-year scholarship to students who successfully complete a trade. I elected to take allied business and computer repair. I completed the Job Corp program in 9 months. I learned office skills like how to type, filing, and using spreadsheet programs. I also learned how to repair computers, and received a computer repair certificate. Job Corps also awarded me a 2-year scholarship to attend West Virginia University Institute of Technology. I wanted to reinforce my previous computer training so I studied Computer Information Technology. My focus was on learning computer networking. When I finished up at WVU Tech, my grades were in good standings but I was a few semesters shy of a degree. I gained valuable experiences from college and I found myself a lot more employable than I was before I entered the military.

After college it wasn’t hard at all to get a job. For some reason I was able to get a secret clearance that enabled me to work certain government contracts. My first contract job involved working on a big Navy Marine Corp computer data migration project at various military locations. I always though that, “if I can still obtain a secret clearance, than I should be able to, somehow, reenlist back in the military.” Since then I’ve been working on getting my electrical journeyman’s license through an electrical union. I still have a passion to work on computers but I would feel like I should be able to contribute to our great military. At this point, the military has labeled me with an undesirable reenlistment code, which prevents me from proving them wrong. I believe that if I were given a second chance, I would make better decisions. I understand how hard it is to become successful in this country without the proper education, training and work ethics.

I respectfully request a second chance to prove myself, family, and country, that I can serve honorably. I respectfully request the Board to consider whether my discharge is both fair and proper. I was happy and proud of myself serving Mother America. I want to be part of making her safe. I still have to live here and that’s why I want to take part in protecting my home. I want to contribute my talents to support and protect this great country, Mother of ours.

If you disagree, please explain in detail why you disagree. The presumption of regularity that might normally permit you to assume that the service acted correctly in characterizing my service as less than honorable doesn’t apply because of the evidence I am submitting.”
Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Copy of DD Form 214
Certificate of Completion, A+ Certification Examination
Transcript, West Virginia University Institute of Technology

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: None
         Active: None

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 970321               Date of Discharge: 980821

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 01 03 24
         Inactive: 00 01 06

 Age at Entry: 22                          Years Contracted: 8

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 64

 Highest Rate: AEAA

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: NMF*                 Behavior: NMF             OTA: NMF

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: None

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

*No marks found in record

 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 :

980128:  NAVDRUGLAB, Great Lakes, IL, reported Applicant’s urine sample, received 980120, tested positive for THC.

980409:  Applicant interviewed by NCIS, Applicant stated he had purchased a substance through “High Times” magazine that was supposed to be a look-a-like of marijuana without the illegal THC.

980514:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 112a: Wrongful use of a controlled substance.
         Award: Forfeiture of $463.05 per month for 1 months, extra duty for 30 days, and an oral reprimand. No indication of appeal in the record.
980611:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with a least favorable characterization of under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.

980611:  Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27(b), elected to waive all rights.
980612:  Commanding Officer 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 19980821 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: Normally, to permit relief, an impropriety or inequity must have existed during the period of enlistment in question. No such impropriety or inequity is evident during the Applicant’s enlistment. 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.

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 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, credible evidence of a substance free lifestyle and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities. As of this time, the Applicant has not provided sufficient documentation for the Board to consider. Relief denied.

Concerning a change in reenlistment code, the NDRB has no authority to change reenlistment codes or make recommendations to permit reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Naval Service or any other branch of the Armed Forces. An unfavorable “RE” code is, in itself, not a bar to reenlistment. A request for a waiver can be submitted during the processing of a formal application for reenlistment through a recruiter. Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) can make changes to reenlistment codes.

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 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 " http://Boards.law.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 | ND03-00214

    Original file (ND03-00214.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-00214 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 20021121, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable, general/under honorable conditions, or entry level separation or uncharacterized, reenlistment code changed from RE-4 to RE-1 and the reason for the discharge be changed to convenience of the government. In the acknowledgement letter, the Applicant was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board first conducts a...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00626

    Original file (ND03-00626.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-00626 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030226. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable and the reason for the discharge be changed to “convenience of the government a RE code change to RE-1 and corresponding SEP. CODE.” The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review. At this time, the Board determined that the documentation submitted by the Applicant does...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01430

    Original file (ND03-01430.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-01430 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030903. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Another goal that I set for myself was enrolling back in school.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01109

    Original file (ND03-01109.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-01109 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030611. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions. At the time I was going through so much with my personal life and my workload as a Mess Management Specialist Third Class (MS3), was too over baring and I couldn’t take the pressure.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-01247

    Original file (ND02-01247.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I even found the person I love the most in the world, my wife. At every job I've had since the Navy I've had to take drug tests. The Applicant is reminded that he remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of his discharge.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00040

    Original file (ND00-00040.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).In the applicant’s issue 1, the Board determined this issue is without merit. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-01007

    Original file (ND04-01007.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND04-01007 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20040607. On February 19th 2003 IC1 P_ and I were talking about my case and he stated the restricted personnel -was doing-working for the Master o farms in BM1 L_'s office the day the urinalysis specimens were sitting in the office.I was told my time to appeal my case was nine months and I have asked for the papers but I have not received anything in the mail. As of this time, the Applicant has not provided...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00942

    Original file (ND99-00942.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    J_ M L_ said, "But (applicant) is now a very mature, responsible, loyal and respectable person. And given the great honor of being published in Outstanding Poets of 1998.I went back to school in 1997 at Wes Watkins Technology Center to complete my automotive technology course. The FSM has also received recognition and awards for outstanding performance while attending school.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00743

    Original file (ND04-00743.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    “To whom this letter concerns,I was discharged from the Navy in June 2003 with an OTH because I failed a drug test for ecstasy. I do have specific reason for attempting to get my OTH to a general 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.

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00518

    Original file (ND99-00518.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND99-00518 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 990302, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. SO I ASK AGAIN PLEASE CONSIDER MY APPLICATION. At this time, the applicant has not provided any documentation of good character and conduct.