Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500242
Original file (ND0500242.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-DCFN, USN
Docket No. ND05-00242

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20041129. 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. The Applicant did not list any representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20050201. 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 3630620.



PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

 Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

1. “ To Personel Board:

I V_ G_ respectfully ask the Department of the Navy to review my records for the sole purpose of changing my other than Honorable Discharge to Honorable discharge. I would like to take this time to apologize to the U.S. Navy and my command on the USS GEORGE WASHINGTON CVN 73 for my behavior, which was due to my cocaine addiction. After realizing that I was addicted to cocaine, I sort out help and received 6 months of in house treatment to address my problem in order to get my life back. Now I have been clean and sober for seven months. I have become a responsible and law abiding citizen by the Grace of God. I am asking the Personnel Board to consider the steps I have taken to become a whole person and to continue on with my life. Now that I am getting married. I would love to have my wife and children to start with a clean slate. Thank you for the opportunity.”

Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Letter of Recommendation dated October 28, 2004

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     910510 - 910514  COG
         Active: None

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 910515               Date of Discharge: 931008

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 02 04 24
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 31                          Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 16                        AFQT: 42

 Highest Rate: DC3

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.70 (4)             Behavior: 3.65 (4)                OTA: 3.75

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM

 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 3630620.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

930909:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 83: Fraudulent enlistment by failing to disclose prior civilian arrests on 910508, violation of UCMJ, Article 112a: Wrongful use of cocaine on 930522.
         Award: Forfeiture of $525.00 pay per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to E-3. No indication of appeal in the record.
930910:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse and defective enlistments and inductions due to fraudulent entry into naval service, as evidenced by his service record.
930910:  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 submit statements on own behalf either verbally or in writing and the right to obtain copies of the documents used to support the basis for the separation.

930924:  Medical evaluation indicates Applicant does not require detoxification, found not drug dependent. He is a habitual (occasional) drug abuser and should be held accountable for his behavior. Not recommended for further Naval Service.

930926:  Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse and defective enlistments and inductions due to fraudulent entry into naval service, as evidenced by his service record.

930930:  BUPERS 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 19931008 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’s service record is marred by award of non-judicial punishment (NJP) for illegal drug use and fraudulent enlistment, thus substantiating the misconduct for which he was separated. Drug abuse warranted processing for separation, normally under other than honorable conditions. 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. 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 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 . 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 | ND0500770

    Original file (ND0500770.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests characterization of service received at the time of discharge changed to general/under honorable conditions and the reason for the discharge changed to JFU Positive Urinalysis. 930923: BUPERS directed the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse (use).930924: Director of Counseling And Assistance Center, Drug and Alcohol Evaluation. The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-01364

    Original file (ND04-01364.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 I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION There is no evidence in the record, nor has the Applicant produced any evidence, to support the contention that the recruiter misled him through the recruitment process.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00618

    Original file (ND02-00618.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    930827: An Administrative Discharge Board, based upon a preponderance of the evidence and by unanimous vote, found that the Applicant had committed misconduct due to drug abuse, that the misconduct warranted separation, and recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions. The Board further recommended discharge be suspended for 12 months. I recommend he be separated from the naval service with an Other Than Honorable discharge, suspended for 12 months.931006: BUPERS directed...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-01072

    Original file (ND00-01072.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    My discharge was inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident in 67 months of outstanding performance of service, as my enlisted service record indicate. 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 states in issue 1 that his “discharge is inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident.” The Board found that the applicant...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600835

    Original file (ND0600835.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND06-00835 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20060608. The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). PART I - ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION Decisional Issues Equity: Isolated incident.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-01043

    Original file (ND04-01043.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Administrative processing is mandatory in accordance with NAVMILPERSMAN 3610260.6.940411: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of defective enlistment and induction due to fraudulent entry into naval service as evidenced by failing to reveal your civilian involvement.940412: Applicant advised of rights and having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to appear before an Administrative Discharge...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501291

    Original file (ND0501291.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ” Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant’s DD Form 214 (2) Certification of military service, dtd January 23, 2003 (2) Letter from Applicant, dtd September 27, 2005 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 19911206 - 19920727 COG Active: None Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 19920728 Date of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00950

    Original file (ND01-00950.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00950 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010717, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. 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): Active: None Inactive: USNR (DEP) 890923 - 900305 COG Period of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00204

    Original file (ND04-00204.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The Applicant’s misconduct is clearly documented. 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.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500203

    Original file (ND0500203.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). Nevertheless, even if the Applicant was improperly denied the Level III treatment, the NDRB is convinced that such an error would have been procedural in nature and not prejudicial to the Applicant’s separation from active duty or to the characterization of his service. PART IV - INFORMATION FOR THE APPLICANT If you believe that the decision in your...