Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500494
Original file (ND0500494.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-SM2(SW), USN
Docket No. ND05-00494

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20050126. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge changed to honorable. The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review. The Applicant did not list a representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20050511. 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 28 months of service with no other adverse action. Being a correctional officer’s great, but not what I had in mine to be in critical thinking If I knew what I know today. I would’ve did 9545. Finish my tour & become a police officer. My progressive attitude, coupled with my desire to succeed, would make me and ideal candidate for the requirements of a demanding situation. I’m currently enrolled in college taking courses in the Respiratory Therapy program at California College of San Diego. You will find that I’m a dedicated individual. My ambitious & assertive personality enables me to maintain effective and efficient performance in a conscientious manner. My goal is to secure a challenging position which will utilize my hard working capabilities to the fullest extend.
In closing, please let me thank you for your time and consideration.”
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)     980430 - 980514  COG
         Active: USN                        980515 - 020317  HON

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 020318*              Date of Discharge: 020814

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 03 11 00
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 18                          Years Contracted: 6*

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 32

 Highest Rate: SM2

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.00 (1)             Behavior: 1.00 (1)                OTA: 2.50

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: GCM, NDSM, SSDR (x2), ESWS

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

* Extracted from Commanding Officer’s letter dated 020717.
Reenlistment contract not found in service 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 :

020318:  Applicant reenlistment (6 years).

020401:  Applicant reported for duty at NS Norfolk Brig.
020628:  NAVDRUGLAB, Jacksonville, Florida, reported Applicant’s urine sample, received 020625, tested positive for THC.

020716:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 112a: Wrongful use of a controlled substance.
         Award: Forfeiture of $799 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to E-4. No indication of appeal in the record.
020716:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse as evidenced by NAVDRUGLAB report 020628.
020716:  Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult with counsel, elected to waive all rights except the right to obtain copies of the documents used to support the basis for the separation.

020717:  Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse (use). Commanding officer stated: “SM3 Hines tested positive for marijuana……”, “As a Correctional Specialist at the Naval Brig, SM3 Hines is fully aware of the Navy’s Zero Tolerance Policy on drugs……”

020801:  Commander Navy Regions Mid-Atlantic directed the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse (use).

020814:  DD Form 214: Applicant discharged

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 20020814 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: When the service of a member of the U.S. Navy has been honest and faithful, it is appropriate to characterize that service as honorable. 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 nonjudicial punishment proceedings for violation of Article 112a of the UCMJ (wrongful use of a controlled substance). 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 Applicant states his discharge was based on one isolated incident in “28 months.”
Despite the servicemember’s prior record of service, certain serious offenses, even though isolated, warrant separation from the naval service in order to maintain proper order and discipline. 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. 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 consider his discharge proper and equitable. Relief denied.

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. 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 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 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 . The Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 33, effective 16 Jul 2001 until 21 Aug 2002, 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 | 2004_Navy | ND04-00404

    Original file (ND04-00404.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND04-00404 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20040115. Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :030128: Performance evaluation states Applicant transferred to TPU Norfolk for Parenthood Separation.030605: Applicant declined any screening or treatment after screening by the Command DAPA.030611: NAVDRUGLAB, Jacksonville, FL, reported Applicant’s urine sample, received 030605, tested positive for THC.030625: Applicant notified of intended...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501414

    Original file (ND0501414.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). PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION 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 | 2001_Navy | ND01-00390

    Original file (ND01-00390.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    During the time I was tested for the THC, I was around several people at a party. The applicant did not provide any post-service documentation for the Board to consider. You may view DoD Directive 1332.28 and other Decisional Documents by going online at " afls10.jag.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:

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-01374

    Original file (ND04-01374.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Moreover I feel that the punishment of me being reduced in rank from an E-4 to E-2 along with a decrease in salary and restriction with extra duty time was sufficient punishment for this one time lack of judgment. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00086

    Original file (ND04-00086.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. Charge I: violation of the UCMJ, Article 86: Specification: Unauthorized absence from 020506 to 020618 (49 days/surrendered). 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 introduced no decisional issues for...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00528

    Original file (ND02-00528.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00528 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020318, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged on 011030 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to drug abuse (use) (A). PART IV - INFORMATION FOR THE APPLICANT If you believe that the decision in your case is unclear,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501438

    Original file (ND0501438.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 20000727 – 20000815 COG Active: None Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 20000816 Date of Discharge: 20020930 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 01 11 03 (Does not include lost time.) The Board presumed that the Commanding...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500565

    Original file (ND0500565.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION _______________________________________________________________________ In accordance with Title 32, CFR, Section 724.116 and SECNAVINST 5420.174D, Part I, Paragraph 1.20, The American Legion submits to the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB or Board) the above issue and following statement in supplement to the Applicant’s...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600438

    Original file (ND0600438.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable or general (under honorable conditions). I was close to finishing my tour that it was unfair to give me a bad discharge.” Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant’s DD Form 214 (service 2) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500339

    Original file (ND0500339.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests his characterization of service received at the time of discharge changed to honorable. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION In accordance with Title 32, CFR, Section 724.116 and SECNAVINST 5420.174D, Part I, Paragraph 1.20, The American Legion submits to the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB or Board) the above issue and following statement in supplement to the Applicant’s petition.