Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-01314
Original file (ND04-01314.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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


ex-MSSA, USN
Docket No. ND04-01314

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20040818. 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 20041222. 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 considered 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 feel I would be a help to the military at this point because of the education and lessons I’ve learned from my short service with the military and schooling I’ve picked up since. I feel I was in a bad situation while serving in the Navy. I had been told stories about the “Filipino Mafia” who were in charge of every S-2 Division Navy-wide. I never believed it until I saw it for myself. Going to MS “A” school was the beginning of it all. The person in charge of the school at the time was Filipino and awarded an undeserving person in our class and award that promoted her to E-4 right out of school, and she just so happened to be of the same race (Filipino)
Next, when I was assigned my first duty station, I walked into my division office and my Chief, Senior Chief, and Master Chiefs were all Filipino. I began to believe this story I was being told. I went to work in the galley after the innitial indoctrination took place and a few month after I began to work I requested leave. I was told my leave was approved and came back to find out my division had counted me AWOL. Instead of my Chief stepping forward and admiting he had never submitted my leave chit, I was punished and my DD 214 was tarnished. This is one of many stories on how I was discriminated against and how the marale within the S-2 division is run into the ground. I only regret choosing the S-2 division, I never regret joining the military. No matter what some papers say, I served honorably, with dignity, and am willing to serve again if the opportunity were ever to come about. I have not touched marijuana since I was caught with it on my possession, it was the outlet I turned to because I was only 19 and unable to drink alcohol. I feel if the opportunity to serve again was brought my way, the military would not regret it.”

 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)     000522 - 000521  COG
         Active: None
Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 000522               Date of Discharge: 010531
Length of Service (years, months, days):

          Active: 01 00 10
          Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 18                          Years Contracted: 4 (12 months extension)
Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 56

 Highest Rate: MSSA
Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 2.00 (1)    Behavior: 1.00 (1)                OTA: 2.00
Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: None
Days of Unauthorized Absence: 5

 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 :

001208:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Absent from unit on 001127 to 001201.
         Award: Forfeiture of $400 per month for 1 month, restriction and extra duty for 23 days. Forfeiture of $400 for 1 month, restriction and extra duty for 15 days suspended for 90 days. No indication of appeal in the record.
001208:  Retention Warning: No further information found in service record. [Extracted from Commanding Officer’s letter dated 010501]
010212:  Summary Court-Martial.
          Charge I: violation of the UCMJ, Article 92:
          Specification: Violating a lawful general regulation by bringing drug paraphernalia on board a naval vessel.
         Charge II: violation of the UCMJ, Article 112a:
          Specification: Wrongful use and possession of marijuana on board a naval vessel.
          Finding: to Charge I and II and the specifications thereunder, guilty.
          Sentence: Forfeiture of $688.00, confinement for 24 days, confinement on bread and water for 3 days. [Extracted from Commanding Officer’s letter dated 010501]
         CA action: Not found in service record.

010228:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct, misconduct due to commission of a serious offense and misconduct due to drug abuse.
010228:  Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights.
010501:  Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct, misconduct due to commission of a serious offense and misconduct due to drug abuse.
010524:  Commander, Cruiser-Destroyer Group ONE 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 20010531 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: The Applicant has not provided any evidence to support his claim of discrimination. There is credible evidence in the record that the Applicant used and possessed 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 Applicant’s service record is marred by award of nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for violating the UCMJ, Article 86 and summary court-martial for violating the UCMJ, Articles 92 and 112a thus substantiating the misconduct . The Applicant’s summary of service clearly reflects the Applicant ’ s disobedience of the orders and directives that regulate good order and discipline in the naval service, demonstrating he was unsuitable for further service. An upgrade to honorable conditions would be inappropriate. 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.
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. Neither a less than fully honorable discharge nor an unfavorable “RE” code is, in itself, a bar to reenlistment. A request for waiver is normally done only during the processing of a formal application for enlistment through a recruiter.

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 31, dated 20 Feb 01, effective 12 Feb 2001 until 15 Jul 2001, Article 1910-146 (formerly 3630620), Separation by Reason of Misconduct - Drug Abuse.

B. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part II, AUTHORITY/POLICY FOR DEPARTMENTAL DISCHARGE REVIEW.

C. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part V, Para 502, Propriety .
D. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part V, Para 503, Equity .

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:

                  Secretary of the Navy Council of Review Boards
                   Attn: Naval Discharge Review Board
                   720 Kennon Street SE Rm 309
                  Washington Navy Yard DC 20374-5023


Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-01248

    Original file (ND99-01248.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Alcohol was an every day part of my life. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Statement form applicant Copy of DD Form 214 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: USNR (DEP) 960530 - 961104 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 961105 Date of Discharge: 980918 Length of Service (years, months,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00469

    Original file (ND99-00469.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    He stated that he is extremely unhappy with military life and particularly duties with this current command the USS ABRAHAM LINCOLN. After a thorough review of the records, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper and equitable (C and D).In response to applicant’s issue 1, the applicant implies that a permissive doctrine exists whereby one in the military is allowed an "isolated incident". The applicant

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600484

    Original file (ND0600484.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The discharge shall remain Under Other Than Honorable Conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse. 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 | 2006_Navy | ND0600168

    Original file (ND0600168.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Subject member examined by a Medical Officer on [this date]2. 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:Secretary of the Navy Council of Review Boards

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-01321

    Original file (ND02-01321.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Character reference, dated August 9, 2002 Character reference, dated August 7, 2002 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 940921 - 950717 COG Active: None Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 950718 Date of Discharge: 970713 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active:...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00290

    Original file (ND00-00290.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’s issue states: “I wish to have my discharge upgrade and would like to receive all my benefits back.” The NDRB found that in the absence of any post service documentation that relief is not warranted. PART IV - INFORMATION FOR THE APPLICANT If you believe that the decision in your case is unclear, not...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-01257

    Original file (ND04-01257.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 WOULD LIKE TO CHANGE MR REENLISTMENT CODE FROM RE 4 TO RE 3 AS SO I MAY HAVE A CHANCE IN THE ARMY I WOULD LIKE TO SERVE MY COUNTRY AGAIN WITH NO MISTAKES.” 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,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500722

    Original file (ND0500722.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review. Mandatory processing for separation is required for sailors who abuse illegal drugs.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00180

    Original file (ND01-00180.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Character Reference ltr from J_ R_, Constable, dtd Nov 1, 2000 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: None Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 910228 Date of Discharge: 930111 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 01 04 08 Inactive: 00 06 05 MSSR (Applicant)...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00089

    Original file (ND03-00089.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The discharge shall remain: UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-146, formerly Article 3630620. Normally, to permit relief, an error or inequity must have existed during the period of enlistment in question. At this time, the applicant has not provided any documentation for the Board to consider.