Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600695
Original file (ND0600695.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-AR, USN
Docket No. ND06-00695

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20060427 . The Applicant requests the Discharge 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 designate a representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20070208 . 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 - ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Decisional Issues

Equity: Post service
Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Employer reference from L_ C. I_, Director, ASU Environmental Health & Safety, dtd August 6, 2004
 Email from D_ C_, Administrative Assistant, dtd June 16, 2004
Certificate of appreciation for dedicated service with OPAC and the Department of Economic Security, dtd August 22, 2002
 Certificate of appreciation for dedicated service with the Department of Economic Security, dtd August 22, 2002
 Pride on the Spot Award, dtd June 22, 2001
 Pride on the Spot Award, dtd June 29, 2001
Pride on the Spot Award, dtd July 19, 2001
 Pride on the Spot Award, dtd July 26, 2001
 Pride on the Spot Award, dtd July 17, 2002
 ASU Web Unofficial Transcripts, dtd March 24, 2006 (3 pages)
Applicant’s DD Form 214 (Member 4)

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     19960726 - 19961009       COG
         Active: None
Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 19961010              Date of Discharge: 19971015

Length of Service (years, months, days):

          Active: 0 1 00 0 6
         Inactive: None

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

Age at Entry: 1 9

Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 12                                 AFQT: 56

Highest Rate: AA

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: NA*                  Behavior: NA*             OTA: NA*
Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, (as listed on the DD Form 214): Marksman M-16A1 Ribbon, Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal; Sea Service Deployment Ribbon .

* Not Available


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

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

970903:  NAVDRUGLAB, San Diego, CA, reported Applicant’s urine sample, received 970825, tested positive for amphetamine, methamphetamine, and THC.
970912 :  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 112a (2 Specs):
         Specification 1: On or about 970825, wrongfully use THC.
         Specification 2: On or about 970825, wrongfully use methamphetamine.
         Award: Forfeiture of $ 450.00 pay per month for 2 month s , restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to E- 1 . No indication of appeal in the record.
970916 :  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with the least favorable characterization of service as under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.

970916 :  Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult with counsel, elected to waive all rights .
970918 :  Commanding Officer, Transient Personnel Unit , recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse .

971007 :  Commander, Naval Base , San Diego , 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 19971015 by reason of misco nduct 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 ). The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs ( D ).
Whenever a member is involved in misconduct due to drug abuse, on the first offense, commanders shall process the member for administrative separation. Characterization of service under other than honorable conditions 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. There is clear evidence in the service record that the Applicant used illegal drugs. Evidence of such misconduct may be used to characterize a member’s discharge under other than honorable conditions. This conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of service, falls well below that required for an upgrade in characterization of service. Relief not warranted.

Equity – Post service: While 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 service, the Board 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. 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. The Applicant submitted unofficial transcripts, an employer references, two certificates of appreciation, and five spot awards for consideration. The Applicant’s efforts need to be more encompassing to include verifiable employment records, documented community service, certification of non-involvement with civil authorities, and credible evidence of a substance free lifestyle. At this time, there is not sufficient documentation of post service character and conduct to mitigate the misconduct that resulted in the characterization of discharge. And so, no relief is granted on this basis.

The Applicant implies that his discharge was inequitable because of his youth and immaturity at the time of service. The Board recognizes that serving in the U.S. Navy is challenging. Our country is fortunate to have men and women willing to endure the hardships and sacrifices required in order to serve their country. Most servicemembers begin their service at a relatively young age. It must be noted that despite their relative youth and immaturity, the vast majority of these members still serve honorably and therefore earn their honorable discharges. In fairness to those members, commanders and separation authorities are tasked to ensure that undeserving Sailors receive no higher characterization than is due. After a thorough review, the Applicant’s records did not show that he was not responsible for his conduct and therefore should not be held accountable. The Board concluded that his service was equitably characterized. Relief on this basis is denied.

The Applicant is advised that there is no requirement or law that grants recharacterization solely on the issue of obtaining Veterans' benefits or enhancing employment and educational opportunities. Regulations limit the Board’s review to a determination of the propriety and equity of the discharge. Since these issues do not provide a foundation upon which the Board can grant relief, relief on this basis is not warranted.

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 post-service accomplishments or any other evidence related to the 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 14, effective
03 Oct 96 until 11 Dec 97, Article 3630620 SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL 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 .
D . Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part II, Para 211, Regularity of Government Affairs .

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 Instruction 1332.28, you may submit a complaint in accordance with Enclosure (5) of that Instruction . You should read Enclosure (5) of the Instruction 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 Instruction 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 | 2001_Navy | ND01-01083

    Original file (ND01-01083.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-01083 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010813, 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).Issue 1 states that the applicant used illegal drugs once, he fully understood the navy’s zero tolerance policy...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00544

    Original file (ND02-00544.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00544 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020318, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. ADMINISTRATIVE DISCHARGE PACKAGE NOT CONTAINED IN SERVICE RECORD AND APPLICANT DID NOT PROVIDE SERVICE RECORD INFORMATION. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700347

    Original file (ND0700347.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Medical and Service Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found that Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214 The NDRB did note administrative error(s) on the original DD Form 214: “CONTINUOUS HONORABLE ACTIVE DUTY SERVICE FROM 19910904 UNTIL 19951101 ” The NDRB will recommend to the Commander, Navy Personnel Command, that the DD 214 be...

  • USMC | DRB | 1999_Marine | MD99-01152

    Original file (MD99-01152.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 introduced no decisional issues for consideration by the Board. Outstanding post-service conduct, 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, may be considered by the NDRB. You...

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0500664

    Original file (MD0500664.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In the acknowledgement letter, the Applicant was informed that she was only eligible for a personal appearance hearing because she had a Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) documentary record discharge review on 20040628. Outstanding post-service conduct, 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, is considered. The Applicant was given 2 weeks from the date of the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00995

    Original file (ND02-00995.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00995 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020708, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable or entry level separation or uncharacterized. Regarding the Applicant’s request to change the characterization of enlistment to uncharacterized or entry level separation, by regulation, only members discharged within the first 180 days of their first enlistment can be given this kind of discharge. The Applicant remains...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-01153

    Original file (ND02-01153.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    970924: 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 general under honorable conditions. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged on 971215 with a characterization of general under honorable conditions for misconduct due to drug abuse (use)...

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0500388

    Original file (MD0500388.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 Violation of UCMJ, Article 89: Specification: Disrespect towards a Superior Commissioned Officer Violation of UCMJ, Article 91: Specification: Insubordinate conduct towards a noncommissioned officer.

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600174

    Original file (MD0600174.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The member has not received any received any pain relief or increase in physical endurance despite eighteen months of rehabilitation while on a limited duty board. 011106: Applicant’s counsel, Capt M. A. C_, USMC, submits letter of deficiency in the Administrative Discharge Board to Commanding General, 2d Force Service Support Group, alleging that the Board improperly admitted into evidence and considered “Counseling Sheets” over counsel’s objection in violation of the Marine Corps’...

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00640

    Original file (MD02-00640.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD02-00640 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020403, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. In the acknowledgement letter to the Applicant, he was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing. We refer this case to the Board for their careful and compassionate consideration and request the...