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

 ex-AD3, USN
Docket No. ND99-00781

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 990518, 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 000323.  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 3630620.

The NDRB did note an administrative error on the original DD Form 214.  Block 18, Remarks, add the following:  “CONTINUOUS HONORABLE ACTIVE SERVICE FROM 850820 UNTIL 940818”.  The original DD Form 214 should be corrected or reissued as appropriate. 

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues (verbatim)

1.  My undesirable discharge was inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident in 13 years of service with no other adverse action.

2.  I was treated very unfairly by my chain of command as well as the SJA.  The acted very unprofessional in handling my situation.

3.	Medical attentions and needs were not met during or after my non-judicial
punishment.  It took a year after discharge to regain medical services.

4.  I proudly served 13 years of naval service.  I was highly evaluated and decorated and did not deserve this treatment.

Documentation

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

Copy of DD Form 214
Written statement from the applicant (13 pages).
Enlisted performance evaluations (20 pages).
Adverse performance evaluation report (2 pages).
Letter from Navy Federal Credit Union.
Early separation request (2 pages).
Special request authorization, dated 25 APR97.
Request for Captain’s Mast, dated July 3, 1997.
Leave request authorization, dated 17 June 97.
Special request authorization, dated 11AUG97.
Special request authorization, dated 11AUG97 (#2).
Patient discharge nurse notes.
Letter from applicant.
Personal property request.
Economy housing inspection request form.
Transfer orders, dated 06OCT 1997.
Notice of determination of benefits rights.
Request for determination of federal military service and wages.
Letter from Department of Veterans Affairs (2 pages).
Veterinary health record.
Veterinary health certificate.
Chronological record of medical care (2 pages).
Veterinary health record.
Veterinary health certificate.
Chronological record of medical care.
Report of medical history (4 pages).
Report of medical assessment (2 pages).
Physician certification of medication dependency for the disability assistance program.

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Active:   USN			920709 - 940818	HON
					850820 - 920708        HON
         	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	841229 - 850819	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  940819		Date of Discharge:  971031

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    03  02  12
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  27			Years Contracted:  3 

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  57

Highest Rate:  AD2

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  3.96 (13)	Behavior:  3.98 (13)		OTA:  3.96 (4.0 scale)
		  3.00 (3)		       2.33 (3)			2.90 (5.0 scale)

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  OSSR (6), SSDR (2), NUC, NDSM, GC (3), MUC (3), AFSM,NSM, SWASM, LOC, KLM(S)

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/MISCONDUCT, authority:  NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630620.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

970911:	Report of urine sample test by NAVDRUGLAB Great Lakes, IL.  The applicant submitted a urine sample during a command directed drug screen and his sample tested positive for THC.

970924:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 112A: Wrongful use, possession, etc., of a controlled substance.
Award:  Forfeiture of $697 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 60 days, reduction to E-4. No indication of appeal in the record.

970924:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under Other Than Honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to Drug abuse as evidenced by Commanding Officer’s non-judicial punishment on 24 September 1997 for violation of UCMJ, Article 112A, for wrongful use of marijuana.

970924:  	Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with counsel, certified under UCMJ, Article 27B, elected to waive all rights except the right to obtain copies of the documents used to support the basis for the separation and to submit statements to the administrative board or the separation authority in lieu of a hearing.

971002:	Commanding officer recommended discharge under Other Than Honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to Drug abuse (Use).  Commanding officer’s comments (verbatim):  I directed AD3 (applicant) be separated from the naval service with an Other Than Honorable discharge for Misconduct due to Drug Abuse.

971020:	BUPERS 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 971031 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).

In the applicant’s issue 1, the Board determined this issue is without merit.  The applicant claims his undesirable discharge was based on one isolated incident in 13 years of service with no other adverse actions.  Having 13 years of service is reason enough not to violate the UCMJ, vice using it as a basis for forgiveness.  The Navy had a zero tolerance for drug policy at the time of the applicant’s enlistment, which requires mandatory processing for administrative separation.  The discharge was proper and equitable.  Relief denied.

In the applicant’s issue 2, the Board determined this issue is without merit.  The applicant claims he was treated unfairly by his chain of command as well as the SJA.  There is no evidence in the applicant’s service record nor did the applicant provide any evidence to support his claim.  Relief denied.

In the applicant’s issue 3, the Board determined this issue is without merit.  The applicant claim’s, medical attention and needs were not met during his non-judicial punishment.  This is a non-decisional issue.  No further comment required since this issue had no bearing on the applicant’s characterization of discharge.

In the applicant’s issue 4, the Board determined this issue is without merit.  The applicant states he proudly served 13 years of naval service.  The applicant honorably served his country for 9 years without incident and was recognized for his accomplishment.  He did not serve honorably during his last enlistment, which was properly characterized as Other Than Honorable.  The discharge was proper and equitable.  Relief denied.

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 5420.174C 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, DC  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, DC.  20374-5023