Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-01409
Original file (ND04-01409.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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


ex-IT3, USN
Docket No. ND04-01409

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20040907. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable. The Applicant requests a documentary record review. The Applicant did not list any representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary 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 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 discharge was inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident in 62 months of outstanding service with no other adverse action.
I started my enlistment as a natural leader in boot camp with other recruits looking up to me. I carried the “guide on” and our divisions’ number, 116, with pride. After boot camp I went to RM “A” school and graduated second in the class with over a 98% average. Achieving this enabled me to advance to an E-4 automatically and choose where I was going to go for my first command, NCTS Keflavik Iceland.

Within the first six months at NCTS Keflavik I became the first Seaman Apprentice to be supervisor qualified ever in the tech control department. After this the command allowed me to automatically advance to E-4 in accordance with my achievements from “A” school. Being supervisor and only an E-4 seemed to have its challenges when explaining to Admirals why they are not receiving any mail. But my chain of command always explained that I was the resident expert and to listen to what I said. This made doing my job less stressful knowing that the chain of command would back me and my decision making. In turn those things made me do more for the command like work on downed circuits past my normal working hours and get more involved with command functions. NCTS Keflavik received many awards for having minimal circuit outages and optimal circuit connectivity, which are both direct results of the work the sections that were under my supervision produced. Upon leaving Iceland I was awarded a Letter of Commendation from the Admiral of NAS Keflavik Iceland.

My next command was to attend ISA “C” school in San Diego in route to USNS Niagara Falls. In “C” school I excelled and graduated at the top of the class. Upon completion of school I was ready to serve on board a ship. I went to the ship expecting to be doing what I went to school for, systems administrator. I ended up in the radio shack doing the complete opposite of what I expected. After adjusting to this I became supervisor qualified within only a few months. While on board the ship we went to East Timor and helped them rebuild their schools which were destroyed by civil conflict. This earned us all humanitarian awards. I also volunteered to serve 3 months in the Persian Gulf while the ship was in the dry docks. The year on board the ship went by and I was destined for my third and final command, NCTAMS Naples Italy.

It was in Naples that I was able to use the skills I acquired at “C” school. I became supervisor qualified in a short time and was in charge of critical information. While at NCTAMS I received my good conduct medal and decided to reenlist in the Navy.

It was one year after reenlisting that I made the most crucial mistake of my life, I was found guilty of a violation of the UCMJ; Article 112(a) - wrongful use of a controlled substance. I went out into town with my Italian friends and had a few too many drinks and got stuck in the middle of peer pressure and trying to fit in with the local people and smoked a joint of marijuana with them. I regret the choice that I made which resulted in the early termination of my second enlistment.

I feel that I served my country with honor, courage and commitment but made one stupid mistake along the way. As you can see from my final evaluation I was not a problem in the Navy and that this was an isolated incident.

I am sorry for what I have done and that is why I would like for my discharge to be changed to a general discharge under honorable conditions. If the discharge is upgraded I can receive my Montgomery GI Bill, go back to school, and earn my degree in computer science and also receive VA benefits as well.

I hope you can see past the error of my mistake and not hold this against me while making your final decision. Thank you for your time and careful consideration in reviewing this case.”

Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Applicant’s Evaluation Report and Counseling Record, dated February 4, 2003

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     971230 - 980106  COG
          Active: USN                        980107 – 020102  HON
Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 020103               Date of Discharge: 030307

 Length of Service (years, months, days):
         Active: 01 02 04
          Inactive: None
Age at Entry: 25                          Years Contracted: 6

Education Level: 12 (GED)                 AFQT: 76
Highest Rate: IT2

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):
Performance: 3.00 (1)    Behavior: 1.00 (1)                OTA: 3.00

 Military Decorations: None
Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM, OSR (2), SSDR, AFEM, GCM

 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 :

020103:  Applicant re-enlisted into the Navy at NCTAMS, Naples, Italy.
030103:  NAVDRUGLAB, Jacksonville, FL., reported Applicant’s urine sample, received 021224, tested positive for THC.
030114:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 112a: Wrongful use of a controlled substance.
         Award: Forfeiture of $874.00 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to E-4. No indication of appeal in the record.
030114:  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.
030114:  Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ, Article 27(b), elected to waive all rights except the right to obtain copies of the documents used to support the basis for the separation.
030128:  Commanding Officer, U. S. Naval Computer and Telecommunications Area Master Station, Europe Central, authorized the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.
030306:  Commanding Officer advised CNPC of Applicant’s discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse. Commanding Officer’s comments (verbatim): Based on IT3 T_ (Applicant)’s misconduct, I administratively processed IT3 T_ (Applicant) from further Naval service on 14 January 2003 using administrative board procedures with a characterization of Other than Honorable discharge.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 20030307 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).
Normally, to permit relief, an error or inequity must have existed during the period of enlistment in question. No such error or inequity is evident during the Applicant’s enlistment. Relief not warranted.

Issue 1: The Applicant states his discharge was based on one isolated incident. 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. The summary of service clearly documents that misconduct due to drug abuse was the reason the Applicant was discharged. 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. No other Narrative Reason for Separation could more clearly describe why the Applicant was discharged. Regulations limit the Board’s review to a determination on the propriety and equity of the discharge. Relief denied.

The Veterans Administration determines eligibility for post-service benefits not the Navy Discharge Review Board. There is no requirement or law that grants recharacterization solely on the issue of obtaining Veterans' benefits and this issue does not serve to provide a foundation upon which the Board can grant relief.

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. 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), re-issued October 2002, effective 22 Aug 2002 until Present, 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 | 2005_Navy | ND0500492

    Original file (ND0500492.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00335

    Original file (ND02-00335.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Recommendation for Disposition from Discipline Officer, TPU, Norfolk PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: USN None Inactive: USNR (DEP) 970115 - 970128 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 970129 Date of Discharge:...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00253

    Original file (ND01-00253.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00253 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 001228, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to Honorable. Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events : 980602: Applicant ordered to active duty.000124: Charges preferred to special court-martial for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), Article 86: Unauthorized absence (UA) from 2230, 2Apr99 until 1400, 2Sep99 (152 days/surrendered).pplicant...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00808

    Original file (ND02-00808.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A direct violation of Article 86 of the UCMJ), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning. No indication of appeal in the record.930723: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse as evidenced by CO's NJP held on 930722.930723: Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with counsel...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00109

    Original file (ND02-00109.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    My record of promotions showed I was generally a good service member. FIRST OFFENSE (Time in Service 2 years): 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 & 2: The applicant requested her discharge be upgraded to honorable based upon her observed and documented performance evaluations.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00823

    Original file (ND03-00823.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-00823 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030410. 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 20040303.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00387

    Original file (ND03-00387.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-00387 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030107. The Applicant requests that the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions and the reason for the discharge be changed to “general under medical condition.” The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review. My ship was in the Gulf for some time and we did many things we were instructed not to discus off the ship to any one.

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0500634

    Original file (MD0500634.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I returned home and was to start back to school two weeks later and were to just do my monthly drills at my unit. So what I’m Asking Today is for the board to review my discharge and change my discharge to an Honorable discharge so that I may enter the Army and start my career were I want to be in life?I thank you for your time today and ask for your help in helping me to do the right thing. Sincerely: L_ F_ (Applicant)” Documentation In addition to the service record, the following...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00343

    Original file (ND01-00343.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    As I previously mentioned the Carl Vinson was having major drug problems and lot sailors were being busted for drugs it was during this time that several of my roommates close friends were busted for drug abuse and put on restriction. We then called in my roommates in and they were asked about three questions in which they denied any involment and then they were dismissed they then called the two friends of my roommates and they both testified under oath about what my roommates had told...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-01332

    Original file (ND02-01332.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-01332 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 20020920, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. Pt is recommended for ongoing psychological support upon return to an IN-CONUS site for a complicated bereavement and adjustment problem. RECOMMENDATION: Pt is recommended for MedEvac to an IN-CONUS facility as an outpatient where she is to receive supportive psychotherapy… Pt is recommended to not return to an...