Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501076
Original file (ND0501076.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB)
 DISCHARGE REVIEW
DECISIONAL DOCUMENT
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

ex-MMFN, USN
Docket No. ND05-01076

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20050616. The Applicant requests the Discharge 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 designate a representative on the DD Form 293.

 Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20051221. 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 and reason for discharge shall not change. The discharge shall remain Under Other Than Honorable Conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.
PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

 No issues were submitted by the Applicant.

 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):
Inactive: USNR (DEP)     20001107 – 20011031      COG (Failed to Graduate)
Inactive: USNR (DEP)     20011116 – 20011210      COG
Active: None

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 20011211             Date of Discharge: 20041221

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 03 00 10 (Does not exclude lost time.)
         Inactive: None

 Time Lost During This Period (days):
         Unauthorized absence:    6 days
         Confinement:                       None

 Age at Entry: 19

Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 11                                 AFQT: 50

 Highest Rate: MM3

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):
Performance: 2.75 (4)             Behavior: 2.25 (4)                OTA: 2 .62

 Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, (as listed on the DD Form 214): National Defense Service Medal.


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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/ MISCONDUCT, authority: MILPERSMAN, Article 1910-146, formerly 3630620 .
Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

021201:  Applicant to unauthorized absence at 1450 on 021201.

 021207:  Applicant from unauthorized absence at 1900 on 021207 (6 days/surrendered).
041021:  Applicant’s acknowledgement and waiver of rights.

 041022:  U.S Naval Criminal Investigative Service: On 041021, LT D_ W_, USN, Staff Judge Advocate, Naval Submarine Support Center (NSSC) requested assistance regarding positive urinalysis result for S/J_ (Applicant). On 041021, S/J_ (Applicant) was advised of his Article 31 (b) rights, which he acknowledged and waived in writing. S/J_ (Applicant) subsequently confessed to smoking marijuana with three civilians while in a vehicle parked outside of Club Intuition, New London, CT. S/J_ (Applicant) had not seen these civilians since he smoked marijuana with them. According to S/J_ (Applicant), this was the first and only time he had used illicit drugs while in the USN.

041110:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Absent from organization.
 Violation of UCMJ, Article 112a.
          Award: Forfeiture of $863 per month for 1 month, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to E-3. No indication of appeal in the record [Extracted from Commanding Officer’s Letter of Recommendation in case file].
041110:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse. Applicant notified that the least favorable characterization of service possible is under other than honorable conditions.
041110:  Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult with counsel, elected to waive all rights.
041012:  Commanding Officer, Naval Submarine Support Center, New London recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse. Commanding Officer’s comments: “Due to this member’s use of illicit drugs while on active duty I recommend that he be discharge from the naval service with an Other than Honorable discharge.”

041116:  Commander, Submarine Group TWO 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 20041221 by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse (A) with a service characterization of under other than 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 (B and C).

 There is credible evidence in the record that the Applicant used illegal drugs. The Applicant was awarded nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for a violation of UCMJ Article 112a, wrongful use, possession, etc., of controlled substances and Article 86, absent from organization. Additionally, the Applicant provided a written statement to NCIS agents confessing his illegal drug use. Regulations permit relief on equitable grounds if the Applicant’s discharge is inconsistent with standards of discipline of the Naval service. 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. The Applicant was properly notified, processed and discharged under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse. Based upon available records, nothing indicates that the Applicant’s discharge was in any way inconsistent with the standards of discipline in the United States Navy. 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 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 any post-service 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), re-issued October 2002, effective 22 Aug 2002 until 28 April 2005, 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 V, Para 502, Propriety .

C. 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 | 2006_Navy | ND0600155

    Original file (ND0600155.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. As of this time, the Applicant has not provided any post-service documentation for the Board to consider. 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 | 2006_Navy | ND0600013

    Original file (ND0600013.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). Violation of UCMJ, Article 92:Specification: In that ET3 H_ E. O_ Jr, (Applicant), USN, Naval Submarine School, having knowledge of a lawful order issued by the Commanding Officer, to wit: Naval Submarine School listing of Off-Limits establishments, an order which it was his duty to obey, did, at or near Hartford, Connecticut on diverse...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500936

    Original file (ND0500936.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). No indication of appeal in the record.030122: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with the least favorable characterization of service as general under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse and misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.030122: Applicant advised of rights and having...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600428

    Original file (ND0600428.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    - Patient is NOT medically clear to participate in the SARP program at this time. (0): Mental status examination reveals a well groomed, articulate, and sophisticated 24year old, male in acute distress He is dressed in the uniform of the day The patient was alert and oriented and attentive to the interview He speaks in a slow, deliberate style with a clear voice and has good eye contact Thought processes are logical and linear There is no evidence of disturbances in thought content Mood is...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600083

    Original file (ND0600083.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND06-00083 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20051014. The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). Specification 2: In that Yeoman Third Class (Submarine) J_ D. D_(Applicant), U.S. Navy Submarine Squadron Support Unit, New London, on active duty, violate a lawful order issued by the Commanding Officer, Submarine Squadron Support Unit, to wit...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600612

    Original file (ND0600612.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). ), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.020308: NAVDRUGLAB, San Diego, CA, reported Applicant’s urine sample, received 020301, tested positive for amphetamine, methamphetamine and THC.020314: Restriction and extra duty for 45 days and reduction...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600214

    Original file (ND0600214.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) and that the Narrative Reason for Separation be changed. The separation authority directed that the Applicant be discharge by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse. The Manual for Courts-Martial authorizes the award of a punitive discharge if adjudged as part of the sentence upon conviction by a special or general court-martial for violation...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600034

    Original file (ND0600034.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Character, Narrative Reason, and Authority of Discharge (at time of issuance):GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS) MISCONDUCT, authority: MILPERSMAN, Article 1910-142 (formerly 3630605). 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 implies that his discharge was improper because he was denied Captain’s Mast. The summary of service clearly...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00682

    Original file (ND00-00682.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 850710 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct pattern frequent involvement of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities (A). 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00609

    Original file (ND02-00609.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-EM3, USN Docket No. ND02-00609 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020404, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions or entry level separation or uncharacterized. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant,...