Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501513
Original file (ND0501513.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-ET3, USN
Docket No. ND05-01513

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20050913. 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 20060614. 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 by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.
PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

 Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

“As is evident in my service record I served the navy and this country very well. I was awarded the navy good conduct medal, qualified submarines, served on four strategic deterrent patrols and served well on board the USS ALABAMA (731-G). I also received good scores on evals and promoted to rank of E-5. I also had a top secret clearance and always obeyed the rules associated there with. I also never once failed a urinalysis, and never compromised my duties. My issues is this for five and a half years I served and served well, but for one mistake, one instance it was all discarded. I would like to consider to serve this country. But for this one instance it was all lost. And I would like a second chance. So I respectfully request to have my discharge upgraded as stated above and my reenlistment code changed from an RE-4 to an RE-1 or one that would allow for my reenlistment. Thank you for your consideration and review.”


Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:

Only the service and medical records were reviewed. 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):
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     19970409 – 19971127               COG
         Active: USN                        19971128 – 20001105               HON

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 20001106             Date of Discharge: 20030604

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 02 06 29
         Inactive: None

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

 Age at Entry: 20

Years Contracted: 5

Education Level: 12                                 AFQT: 80

 Highest Rate: ET2

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.0 (2)              Behavior: 2.0 (2)                 OTA: 2 .60

Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, (as listed on the DD Form 214): Strategic Deterrent Patrol Pin (4), National Defense Service Medal, Navy Good Conduct 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 :

001106:  Reenlisted this date for a term of 5 years.
030205:  Charges preferred for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) Article 112a: Wrongfully use Ketamine, a Schedule II controlled substance.

030206:  Charges referred to special court-martial.

030422:  Special Court-Martial.
         Charge: violation of the UCMJ, Article 112a: In that Electronic Technician Second Class R_ A. M_, U.S. Navy, Submarine Group 9, Bangor, Washington, on active duty, did, at or near Silverdale, Washington, on or about October 2002, wrongfully use Ketamine, a Schedule II controlled substance. Plea : Guilty. Findings : Guilty.
          Sentence: Fined $1000.00 for 1 month, confinement for 30 days, reduced to E-4. Pretrial agreement disapproved fine.
         
030429:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with the least favorable characterization of service under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct drug abuse.

030429:  Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult with counsel, elected to waive all rights.
030521:  Commanding Officer, Staff Enlisted Personnel, Submarine Group 9 recommended to Commander, Submarine Group 9 that Applicant be discharged under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct drug abuse. Commanding Officer’s comments: “ET2 M_ (Applicant) has over 5 years of active duty service, with a recent re-enlistment on 001106. As a senior petty officer, he chose to ignore the Navy’s Zero Tolerance Policy concerning drug abuse and jeopardize his career as a Submarine Sailor. His actions demonstrate a clear disregard for Navy Regulations and are prejudicial to good order and discipline. ET2 M_ (Applicant) is, therefore, no longer suited for a career in the naval service. I recommend he be discharged with a characterization of Other than Honorable.”


030522:  Medical evaluation by Clinical Psychologist, Naval Hospital Bremerton.
          AXIS I: No Diagnosis/RTD, Legal Problem, Occupational Problem.
         AXIS II: No Diagnosis
         AXIS III: Deferred to Physician
         AXIS IV: Discharge from Navy
         AXIS V: GAF=75 (current)
         Recommendation: Level of Treatment: None. Return to command; no further follow up indicated.
030527:  GCMCA, Commander, Submarine Group 9 authorized the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct pattern of minor disciplinary infraction.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW
Discussion
The Applicant was discharged on 20030604 by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse (A and B) 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 (C and D).

The Applicant states, “that for five and a half years I served the navy and this country very well”. The Applicant further contends that he “made one mistake, and in one instance it was all discarded”. The NDRB advises the Applicant that despite a 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 a special court martial for illegal drug use, thus substantiating the misconduct for which he was separated. 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 requests a “reenlistment code change from an RE-4 to an RE-1 or one that would allow for his reenlistment”. Since the NDRB has no jurisdiction over reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Navy, Marine Corps, or any other of the Armed Forces, NDRB is not authorized to change a reenlistment code. An unfavorable “RE” code is, in itself, not a bar to reenlistment. A request for a waiver can be submitted during the processing of a formal application for reenlistment through a recruiter. Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) can make changes to reenlistment codes.

The following is provided for the edification of the Applicant. 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 additional evidence related to this discharge. 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 Present, Article 1910-146 (formerly 3630620), Separation by Reason of Misconduct - Drug Abuse.
B. 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 of the UCMJ, Article112a (wrongful use of a controlled substance).
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 | 2006_Navy | ND0600271

    Original file (ND0600271.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Furthermore this was my second discharge, my first being on 09Jun2001 when I Star reenlisted, there fore my first discharge was an Honorable (I did not recieve a DD 214 for this discharge) discharge and that was the enlistment that I opted for GI Bill and Navy College Fund, both of which I cannot recieve at this time due to second discharge.” Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant’s DD Form...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501005

    Original file (ND0501005.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I strongly recommend that he be separated from the naval service and his service be characterized as Other Than Honorable”.010809: Commander, Submarine Group 9 The Applicant provided 12 character/job reference letters, 80 pages from his service record and 6 certificates of training earned during his service, as documentation of his post service accomplishments. The Applicant can provide documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments or any other evidence related to his...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600307

    Original file (ND0600307.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). 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 requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). The names, and...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600162

    Original file (ND0600162.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Petty Officer M_(Applicant) was separated locally for personality disorder, pattern of misconduct and commission of a serious offense. The Applicant implies that his discharge was improper due to contradicting statements from his command and because he was not “given the right to take matters further up Chain of Command.” In the Applicant’s remarks from DD Form 293, the Applicant implies that he was denied his “rights to see the admiral.” The Applicant also states that he was not given...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500985

    Original file (ND0500985.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. 040527: Applicant advised of rights and having consulted with counsel, elected to appear before an Administrative Discharge Board.040714: An Administrative Discharge Board, based upon a preponderance of the evidence and by unanimous vote, found that the Applicant had committed commission of a serious offense and alcohol rehabilitation failure, that such misconduct...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600298

    Original file (ND0600298.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable and the Narrative Reason for Separation be changed to “ CONVENIENCE ” . The Applicant requests an upgrade of his discharge based in part on his record of in service performance before the misconduct. 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0501353

    Original file (MD0501353.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. ” • The Applicant was awarded nonjudicial punishment for violating Article 112a of the UMCJ.Therefore, the Board found there is credible evidence in the record that the Applicant used illegal drugs. Therefore, the Board determined the Applicant has not provided sufficient post-service documentation for the Board to consider.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600512

    Original file (ND0600512.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Commanding Officer’s comments: “ Recommend an administrative separation from the Naval Service with a characterization of service of General (Under Honorable Conditions) by reason of Misconduct - Drug Abuse. 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 “My discharge was inappropriate because it was based on incidents during an isolated...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00249

    Original file (ND04-00249.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to entry-level separation. It has been a little over two years since I have been out the navy. 010809: Commander, Submarine Group 9 directed the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.

  • 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,...