Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500642
Original file (ND0500642.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-SR, USNR
Docket No. ND05-00642

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20050308. 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. Subsequent to the application, the Applicant obtained representation from the American Legion.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20050831 . 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 3630600.


PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

 Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

“For employment reasons I request an honorable discharge from the Navy I seek employment with the State of Kansas and this discharge is a huge black mark on my record The only justification I have is that I was a good sailor and served with pride and honor for 18 months and one night of peer pressure ruined my record one strike and I was gone no do over I am extremely sorry for my actions that night and I apologize Please help me to better myself and my family Thank you for your time and consideration. [Signed] R_ G_ (Applicant)”

 The American Legion submitted no issues for consideration.

 Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Letter of recommendation, dated July 1, 1994
Applicant’s DD Form 214

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     930909 - 931011  COG
         Active: None

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 931012               Date of Discharge: 950405

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 01 05 24
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 18                          Years Contracted: 8

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 59

 Highest Rate: SA

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.80 (1)             Behavior: 4.00 (1)                OTA: 3.80

 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 3630600.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

950224:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 107: False official statement on 950223, violation of UCMJ, Article 112a: Wrongful use of amphetamine/methamphetamine, violation of UCMJ, Article 134: Altering an I.D. card on 940612.
         Award: Forfeiture of $427 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to E-1. No indication of appeal in the record.
950224:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense (processing not mandatory) and drug abuse, as evidence by all offenses for which a punitive discharge would be authorized by the Manual for Courts-Martial for the same or a closely related offense and all incidents of drug abuse in your current enlistment. The least favorable character of service possible is under other than honorable conditions.
950224:  Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights.
950303:  Medical evaluation for drug abuse found the Applicant not to be psychologically or physically dependent.
950313:  Drug and Alcohol Abuse Report: Amphetamines abuse, ashore off duty. Random urinalysis 960213. Physician found Applicant not dependent. Commanding Officer recommended separation. Comments: Commanding Officer has determined member is not dependent on drugs (based on medical officer diagnosis). Members past and present performance are below average. Member exhibits no potential for further productive service. Member presently being processed for administrative separation.
950317:  Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense (processing not mandatory) and drug abuse.

950405:  BUPERS directed the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 19950405 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (A and 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).

 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 nonjudicial punishment proceedings for violations of Articles 107, 112a and 134 of the UCMJ. Violations of Article 107 are considered serious offenses. 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 night of peer pressure.” Mandatory processing for separation is required for sailors who abuse illegal drugs. The Applicant’s service record is marred by award of nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for illegal drug use, a false official statement and altering an ID card. Separation under these conditions generally results in characterization of service under other than honorable conditions. Additionally, the Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational opportunities. 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 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. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 9, effective
22 Jul 94 until 02 Oct 96, Article 3630600, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT – COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE.

B. Under the Manual for Courts-Martial, a punitive discharge is authorized for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Article 107, false official statement, if adjudged at a Special or General Court-Martial.

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 | ND99-00755

    Original file (ND99-00755.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND99-00755 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 990310, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. 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).In the applicant’s issue 1, the Board found that t Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)A.Naval Military...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00003

    Original file (ND01-00003.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Drug History: Denies any previous use. 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 was discharged appx 3 months after serving 45 days/ 45 days restricted duty 1/2 months pay for 2 months and reduction in rate from an E-5 to an E-1 this was the first offense I was charged with which I was found guilty. I feel with these...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-01071

    Original file (ND00-01071.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 feel my discharge was improper because, I was discharged for misconduct that I did not commit. While the applicant’s service record shows various decorations, his documented misconduct outweighed his otherwise creditable service. PART IV - INFORMATION FOR THE APPLICANT If you...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600427

    Original file (ND0600427.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Partial relief based upon this impropriety is warranted.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. ” 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00640

    Original file (ND04-00640.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Reduction to E-1.CA 941216: Sentence approved and ordered executed.941205: Applicant requested clemency.941221: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge and the least favorable characterization of your service may be other under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense and drug abuse as evidenced by your...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00775

    Original file (ND04-00775.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. Decision A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20041029. Therefore, no relief will be granted.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 | 2005_Navy | ND0500247

    Original file (ND0500247.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. As of this time, the Applicant has not provided any documentation for the Board to consider. 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:

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500854

    Original file (ND0500854.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 contends that he deserves a record reflective of his in-service dedication to the U.S. Navy as evidenced by his 12 years of good service, various awards including two Navy Achievement Medals, and his position as a Chief Petty Officer in charge of a division of 42 Sailors. The Applicant's misconduct is...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00582

    Original file (ND01-00582.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00582 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010327, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable and the reason for the discharge be changed. Decision A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 011018. Award: Restriction and extra duty for 45 days.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-01014

    Original file (ND00-01014.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    930805: Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense. At this time, the applicant has not provided any documentation of good character and conduct. You may view DoD Directive 1332.28 and other Decisional Documents by going online at " afls14.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...