DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
					2 NAVY ANNEX
	WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

	SMW
Docket No: 8556-05
9 March 2006

From:	Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records
To:	Secretary of the Navy

	Subj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD OF 

Ref:	(a) 10 U.S.C. 1552

End:	(1) Case Summary
(2)	Subject’s Naval record

1.	Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a) , Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the United States Navy, applied to this Board requesting a general discharge vice the other than honorable discharge issued on 10 October 1989.

2. The Board, consisting of reviewed Petitioner’s a1T~gations of error and injustice on 8 March 2006, and pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of the enclosures, Naval records, and applicable statutes, regulations and policies.

3.	The Board, having reviewed all the facts of record pertaining to Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice finds as follows:

a.	Before applying to this Board, Petitioner exhausted all administrative remedies available under existing law and regulations within the Department of the Navy.

b.	Although Petitioner’s application was not filed in a timely manner, it is in the interest of justice to waive the statute of limitations and review the application on its merits.

c.	Petitioner enlisted in the Navy on 20 July 1988 at age 18 and then served without incident for about a year.

d.	On 27 June 1989 a drug and alcohol abuse evaluation stated that Petitioner voluntarily admitted to abusing alcohol and using illegal drugs. The evaluation recommended treatment, but indicated that his potential for future service was poor due to his alcohol and drug dependency, and lack of time in service.

e.	On 28 June 1989 Petitioner received a psychiatric evaluation that diagnosed him as being polysubstance dependent and having an addictive, immature and dependent personality disorder. The evaluation stated that he had turned himself in so he would not act on his suicidal ideation. On 18 July 1989 another psychiatric evaluation again diagnosed him with polysubstance dependent and an immature personality disorder and found suicidal ideation. This evaluation recommended attendance at Alcohol Anonymous meetings while awaiting administrative discharge.

f.	On 1 September 1989 the commanding officer initiated administrative separation action by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse. Petitioner waived the right to have his case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB). On 14 September 1989, the commanding officer recommended an other than honorable discharge. On 25 September 1989 the commanding officer approved his recommendation of 14 September 1989 and directed an other than honorable discharge. On 10 October 1989 Petitioner was separated with an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse. Petitioner’s military behavior and overall trait averages were 3.2 and 3.4, respectively.

g.	In his application, Petitioner states that he was a young man from a rural area and was not prepared for the real world. He admits to his mistake and requests that his other than honorable discharge be upgraded to a general discharge.

h.	The Board is aware that the commanding officer (CO) had authority to initiate administrative separation by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse, and recommend an other than honorable discharge. However, the authority to separate a member with an other than honorable discharge rested with the Commander, Naval Military Personnel Command (NMPC). Officers with special court-martial convening authority such as the CO only had authority to separate enlisted members with an honorable or general discharge.

CONCLUSION:

Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, the Board concludes that Petitioner’s request warrants relief. The Board believes the Petitioner’s discharge was not processed in accordance with regulations, specifically, the commanding officer had the authority to initiate administrative separation action and recommend an other than honorable discharge, but he did not have the authority to approve an other than honorable discharge. Given Petitioner’s service record, self-referral, and military behavior and overall trait averages, the Board concludes that Petitioner’s separation should be changed to a general discharge.

2
RECOMMENDATION:
a.	That Petitioner’s Naval record be corrected to show that he received a general discharge on 10 October 1989, vice the other than honorable discharge actually issued on that date.

b.	That a copy of this Report of Proceedings be filed in Petitioner’s Naval record.

c.	That upon request, the Veterans Administration be informed that Petitioner’s application was received by the Board on 13 September 2005.

4. it is certified that a quorum was present at the Board’s review and deliberations, and that the foregoing is a true and complete record of the Board’s proceedings in the above entitled matter.

ROBERT D. ZSALMAN	ALAN E. GOLDSMITH
Recorder	Acting Recorder

5. Pursuant to the delegation of authority set out in Section
6(e) of the revised Procedures of the Board for Correction of Naval Records (32 Code of Federal Regulation, Section 723.6(e)) and having assured compliance with its provisions, it is hereby announced that the foregoing corrective action, taken under the authority of reference (a), has been approved by the Board on behalf of the Secretary of the Navy.

								W. DEAN PFEIFFER
								Executive Director