Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600891
Original file (ND0600891.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-BM2, USN
Docket No. ND06-00891

Applicant ’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20060620 . 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 20070405 . 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 General (Under Honorable Conditions) by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.


PART I - ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Decisional Issues
Equity – Isolated Incident

Documentation
In addition to the service and medical record s , the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant , was considered:
Applicant ’s DD Form 214 (Member 4)
Applicant ’s Good Conduct Award, dated January 4, 2003
 Applicant ’s Letter of Appreciation, dated December 15, 2000 (2)
 Applicant ’s citation from Commanding Officer, USS ANCHORAGE (LSD 36)
 Applicant ’s citation from Commander, Amphibious Group THREE
 Twelve pages from Applicant ’s service record
 Job/Character Reference ltr from P_ T. M_, dated June 1, 2006
Letter confirming attendance from Information Technology Program, dated March 22, 2004
Letter confirming attendance from Information Technology Program, dated May 3, 2004
Letter confirming attendance from Information Technology Program, dated June 16, 2004
 Applicant ’s certificate of live birth
 Applicant ’s social security card
 Applicant ’s letter to Senator J_ W_, dated May 1, 2006
 Letter from Senator J_ W_, dated June 16, 2006
 Applicant ’s certificate of completion of Seaman Apprentice Training Course, dated August 7, 2000
 Applicant ’ appointment as Information Systems Security Representative for the Local Area Network, undated
Performance Information Memorandum, dated August 31, 2000
Performance Information Memorandum dated March 14, 2002
Performance Information Memorandum dated December 11, 2002

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     19991208 - 20000104       COG
         Active: None
Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 20000105              Date of Discharge: 20031227

Length of Service (years, months, days):

          Active: 0 3 11 23
         Inactive: None

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

Age at Entry: 18
Years Contracted: 4 ( 24 -month extension)

Education Level: 12                                 AFQT: 75

Highest Rate: BM2

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.8 ( 4 )                        Behavior: 4 .0 ( 4 )                 OTA: 3 . 54

Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, (as listed on the DD Form 214): Navy Expeditionary Medal; Humanitarian Service Medal, Navy Good Conduct Medal, National Defense Service Medal (2 nd ) Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal; Sea Service Deployment Ribbon (3 rd )


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

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

031227 :  DD Form 214: Applicant discharge d with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.

Service Record did not contain the Administrative Discharge package.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion
The Applicant was discharged on 20031227 by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse (A and B) with a service characterization of 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 Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (E).
The Applicant states his discharge was based on one isolated incident in “48 months.”
Despite a servicemember’s record of service, certain serious offenses, even though isolated, warrant separation from the Naval service in order to maintain proper order and discipline. 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. Regulations limit the Board’s review to a determination of the propriety and equity of the discharge. In the Applicant’s case, the Board could discern no impropriety or inequity and therefore considers his discharge proper and equitable. Relief denied.

The Applicant provided evidence of post service accomplishments in support of his request for upgrade. 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 the service. The NDRB is authorized to consider outstanding post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge, 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. After a complete review of the entire record, including the evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board determined that the discharge was appropriate and that the evidence of post-service conduct was found not sufficient to mitigate the conduct, which precipitated the discharge. Relief denied.

The Applicant requests upgrade because it negatively affects his ability to obtain employment with the civil service. The Veterans Administration determines eligibility for post-service benefits, not the Naval Discharge Review Board. 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 of the propriety and equity of the discharge.

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, Article 112a (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 .

 E. 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 | 2004_Navy | ND04-00345

    Original file (ND04-00345.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Yet even despite his full knowledge of that incident and the resulting discharge of BM2 W_ (Applicant), of the opportunity to have BM2 W_ (Applicant) back in the “teams,” he writes: “Since his discharge, Petty Officer W_ (Applicant) has had the time to reflect on his actions, and more importantly, has corrected the personal problems that had negative implications on his career. ...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600525

    Original file (ND0600525.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). I ask that you review my record, and you will find that in the four years and seven months of my enlistment I have been in no trouble and have received good conduct. I feel he has no potential for further military service and his offense warrants an administrative separation from the naval service by reason of Misconduct - Drug Abuse and...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600018

    Original file (ND0600018.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. CM continues to follow.040513: 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 such misconduct warranted separation, and recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions. Therefore, I concur with the Administrative Board and...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600491

    Original file (ND0600491.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The discharge shall remain Under Other Than Honorable Conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse. AKAN V_’s continued presence in this command is prejudicial to the good order to conduct of the naval service.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01499

    Original file (ND03-01499.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. I request that all recommendations be overturned & new determinations of fact finding be made and Board Action change my discharge to an Honorable.”Issues submitted by Applicant’s counsel/representative (VETERANS OF FOREIGN WARS): Based upon the details of the Applicant’s offenses and in consideration of the Applicant’s rank, record of service, and all documentation available...

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600350

    Original file (MD0600350.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. 910315: GCMCA, Commanding General, Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center, Twentynine Palms, California, directed the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct, specifically, drug abuse.910328: Applicant evaluated by a medical officer and diagnosed as being drug or alcohol dependent. The Applicant requests the Board consider...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500364

    Original file (ND0500364.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable or general (under honorable conditions). PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged on 19990818 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to drug abuse (A). There is credible evidence in the form of the Applicant’s own admission and a positive urinalysis screening, that he used illegal drugs.

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600723

    Original file (MD0600723.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant informed the least favorable character of service possible was as general (under honorable conditions). Separation under these conditions generally results in characterization of service under other than honorable conditions but in the Applicant’s case the Separation Authority directed a characterization of service of General (Under Honorable Conditions). You may view DoD Instruction 1332.28 and other Decisional Documents by going online at “ http://Boards.law.af.mil ” .The...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501076

    Original file (ND0501076.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). 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600885

    Original file (ND0600885.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the NDRB determined there was inequity in the characterization of the Applicant’s service even though the discharge was determined to have been otherwise equitable and proper at time of issuance . The Applicant argues that his discharge should be upgraded in part based on his post-service conduct. The Board voted to upgrade the Applicant’s characterization of discharge to General...