Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500165
Original file (ND0500165.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-QMSR, USN
Docket No. ND05-00165

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20041105. 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 20050107. 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 – Drug abuse (Use), authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630620.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

 Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

1. “Since my discharge, I have been in no trouble. I have completed drug rehab and am a productive member of society who pays income taxes.”
Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Applicant’s DD Form 214

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: None
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     891027 - 891212  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 891213               Date of Discharge: 930521

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 03 05 09
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 21                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 53

 Highest Rate: QM3

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.90 (3)             Behavior: 3.90 (3)                OTA: 3.90

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM, SASM

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: 15

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/Misconduct – Drug abuse (Use), authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630620.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

891229:  DAAR: Marijuana abuse, 1-3 times per week as result of service directed urinalysis. Physician found Applicant not dependent and amenable and eligible for counseling and recommend Level I treatment.

930319:  DAAR: Cocaine abuse, result of unit sweep urinalysis. DAPA recommended separation.


930405:  Special Court-Martial
         Charge I: Article 86 (2 specs):
         Specification 1: UA from unit from 930219 to 930222.
         Specification 2: UA from 930222 to 930309.
         Charge II: Article 112a:
         Specification: Wrongfully use cocaine, on or about 930105.
         Charge III: Article 123a (10 specs):
         Specification 1: On or about 18 February 1993, unlawfully make a certain check in the amount of $34.55 with intent to defraud.
         Specification 2: On or about 18 February 1993, unlawfully make a certain check in the amount of $32.90 with intent to defraud.
         Specification 3: On or about 18 February 1993, unlawfully make a certain check in the amount of $33.16 with intent to defraud.
         Specification 4: On or about 22 February 1993, unlawfully make a certain check in the amount of $10.65 with intent to defraud.
         Specification 5: On or about 22 February 1993, unlawfully make a certain check in the amount of $30.00 with intent to defraud.
         Specification 6: On or about 22 February 1993, unlawfully make a certain check in the amount of $31.19 with intent to defraud.
         Specification 7: On or about 22 February 1993, unlawfully make a certain check in the amount of $30.00 with intent to defraud.
         Specification 8: On or about 22 February 1993, unlawfully make a certain check in the amount of $29.45 with intent to defraud.
         Specification 9: On or about 22 February 1993, unlawfully make a certain check in the amount of $27.14 with intent to defraud.
         Specification 10: On or about 22 February 1993, unlawfully make a certain check in the amount of $31.27 with intent to defraud.
         Findings:
         To Charge I: Guilty
                  Spec 1: Not Guilty
                  Spec 2: Guilty
         To Charge II: Guilty
         To Charge III and all specifications thereunder: Not Guilty
         Sentence: To be confined for a period of 50 days and reduced to E-2.

930413:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.
930413:  Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights.
930428:  Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse (use).

930510:  CNMPC directed the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse (use).

930513:  NJP for violations of UCMJ, Article 86: UA from 0730 930513 to 1005 930513. Article 112a: Wrongfully use cocaine.
         Award: Forfeiture of ½ pay per month for 2 month(s), restriction and extra duty for 45 days, RIR. No indication of appeal in the record.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 19930521 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. An Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge is warranted when significant negative aspects of a member's conduct or performance of duty outweigh the positive aspects of the member's military record. The Applicant’s service was marred by a conviction at court-martial for violations of Articles 86 and 112a of the UCMJ and subsequent nonjudicial punishment proceedings for violations of the same Articles. The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, reflects his willful failure to meet the requirements of his contract with the U.S. Navy and falls far short of that required for an upgrade of his characterization of service. Relief is not warranted.

The following is provided for the edification of the Applicant. Normally, to permit relief, a procedural impropriety or inequity must have occurred during the discharge process for the period of enlistment in question. The Board discovered no impropriety after a review of Applicant’s case. 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 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 any documentation for the Board to consider. Relief denied.

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. Navy Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 5/93, effective 05 Mar 93 until 21 Jul 94, Article 3630620, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED MEMBERS BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT DUE TO 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 | ND0500675

    Original file (ND0500675.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. No indication of appeal in the record.031124: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with the least favorable characterization of service under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and misconduct commission of a serious offense.031124: Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult with counsel...

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00306

    Original file (MD02-00306.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION This ended with brig time and a Bad Conduct Discharge. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was involuntarily separated on 870204 with a bad conduct discharge which was the sentence adjudged by a properly constituted special court martial that was determined to be legal and proper, affirmed in the legal chain of review and executed (A and B).

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501545

    Original file (ND0501545.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 T_ T. C_ (Applicant), undated, not signedNational Personnel Records Check for Applicant, dtd November 4, 2005 Ltr form National Personnel Records Center, dtd February 13, 2006 Applicant’s DD Form 214 (Service 2) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: None Active:...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600230

    Original file (ND0600230.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND06-00230 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20051118. Naval Reserve, USS JOHN F. KENNEDY, on active duty, did, at Navy Exchange, Naval Station, Norfolk, Virginia, on or about August 1992, with intent to defraud, falsely make in its entirety a certain check in the following words and figures, to wit: (copy of the check, number 0107 to NEX in the amount $150.00) which said check would, if genuine, apparently operate to the legal harm of...

  • USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-00158

    Original file (MD01-00158.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD01-00158 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 001121, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to Honorable. 940830: Applicant's counsel submitted a letter to the commanding general requesting that the applicant's request for separation in lieu of trial by courts-martial be approved and that characterization of service be under Honorable conditions (General). You should read Enclosure (5) of the Directive before submitting...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600708

    Original file (ND0600708.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged on 19930712 by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (A and B) with a service characterization of under other than honorable conditions. ” The names, and votes of the members of the Board are recorded on the original of this document and may be...

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600071

    Original file (MD0600071.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). Not appealed.031030: Charges preferred against Applicant: Charge I: Violation of the UCMJ, Article 92, Specification 1: In that Private L_ H. W_(Applicant), U.S. Marine Corps Reserve, Marine Aircraft Group 49 Det B, 4th Marine Aircraft Wing, Marine Forces Reserve, Newburgh, New York, on active duty having knowledge of a lawful order issued by...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600165

    Original file (ND0600165.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND06-00165 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20051103. After returning from treatment, the member states she did not gamble at all for nearly 9 months, and then in July 01, she began to gamble excessively again. Relief denied.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.

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0500762

    Original file (MD0500762.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable and that the narrative reason for separation be changed to: “RE code.” The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review. My problems had to do with my off duty time. The applicant did not provide additional documentation for the Board’s consideration PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active:...

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1002044

    Original file (MD1002044.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s service record documents that he completed the adjudicated period of confinement as awarded by the Special Court-Martial sentence. On 14 May 1996, the Applicant submitted a request for clemency to the Convening Authority; on 19 August, the Convening Authority acted on the request for clemency and reduced the sentence of confinement for six years to a period of four years. Having conducted a detailed review of both the records of trial by Special and by General Court-Martial...