DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
 NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB)
                     DISCHARGE REVIEW
                   DECISIONAL DOCUMENT

 ex-GSMFN, USN
Docket No. ND99-00513

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 990301, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions.  The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review.  The applicant did not list any representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 991213.  After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, NDRB discerned no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the applicant’s service.  The Board’s vote was unanimous that the character of the discharge shall not change.  The discharge shall remain: UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-146, formerly Article 3630620.

The NDRB did note an administrative error on the original DD Form 214.  Block 25, Separation Authority should read:  “MILPERSMAN Article 1910-146” vice “MILPERSMAN 3630620”.  The original DD Form 214 should be corrected or reissued as appropriate. 

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

1.  My discharge did not consider my 33 months of honorable service during which time I was recommended for third class petty officer. (I passed the test, but was not advanced due to quota) my one mistake weighed against the severity of my punishment seems inequitable - - the one isolated incident in my 33 months was the only adverse action.

2.  My DD 214 Block 15 a says I did not contribute to Post-Vietnam era VEAP.  During my 1st year of service deductions were taken from my pay for post service education.

Documentation

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

Copy of DD Form 214 (2 copies)

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):

	Active:   None
	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	950714 - 950816	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  950817		Date of Discharge:  980519

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    02  09  03
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  19			Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  56

Highest Rate:  GSMFN

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  NMF*		Behavior:  NMF		OTA:  NMF

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  NDSM 

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None

*See back of DAAR #30.

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/MISCONDUCT, authority:  NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-146, formerly 3630620.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

980324:	NAVDRUGLAB Jacksonville, FL, reported applicant’s urine sample, received 980316, tested positive for THC.

980325:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 112A: Wrongful use or possession of a controlled substance.
Award:  Oral reprimand.  No indication of appeal in the record.

980331:	Drug and Alcohol Abuse report: Marijuana abuse, 1-3 times a week, ashore off duty, urinalysis unit sweep 12Mar98.  Commanding officer recommended separate via VA hospital.  Previous disciplinary history:  Civ:  Jun95, illegal consumption/paraphernalia, fined $750.00, Feb95, trespassing, fined $75.00, Jul94, speeding, fined $75.00.

980402:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse as evidenced by the results of a command-wide urinalysis conducted aboard USS KAUFFMAN on 12 March 1998.

UNDATED:  	Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights.

980408:	Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse (use). 

980409:	COMFAIRMED Naples Italy directed the applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse (use).

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 980519 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to drug abuse (use) (A).  The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (B).  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’s first issue (equity) states the discharge authority did not consider his 33 months of service.   The NDRB found the applicant’s discharge for his NJP, wrongful use of marijuana, proper and equitable.  The Other Than Honorable discharge was in fact equitable and could have resulted in a punitive discharge at court martial.   Relief not warranted. 

The applicant’s second issue regarding VEAP contributions is irrelevant and non decisional.  Relief not warranted. 
Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  The Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 18, effective 12 Dec 97 to 19 May 99, Article 1910-146 (formerly 3630620), Separation by Reason of Misconduct - Drug Abuse.

B.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (Manual for Discharge Review, 1984), enclosure (1), Chapter 2, AUTHORITY/POLICY FOR DEPARTMENTAL DISCHARGE REVIEW.  

C.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (Manual for Discharge Review, 1984), enclosure (1), Chapter 9, paragraph 9.2, PROPRIETY OF THE DISCHARGE.

D.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (Manual for Discharge Review, 1984), enclosure (1), Chapter 9, paragraph 9.3, EQUITY OF THE DISCHARGE.

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 obtain a copy of DoD Directive 1332.28 by writing to:

		DA Military Review Boards Agency
		Management Information and Support Directorate
		Armed Forces Reading Room
		Washington, D.C.  20310-1809

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:

		Naval Council of Personnel Boards
		Attn:  Naval Discharge Review Board
		Washington Navy Yard
		720 Kennon Street SE Rm 309
		Washington, D.C.  20374-5023