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

 ex-CTM2, USN
Docket No. ND99-01003

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 990721, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to Honorable.  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 000411.  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: GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-146, formerly Article 3630620.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

1. I was in the active duty United States Navy from March 11, 1987 through April 15, 1998.  During that time, I received a Navy Commendation Medal, a Joint Service Achievement Medal three Navy Achievement Medals while acquiring the rank of Petty Officer First Class in the Cryptologic Technical Maintenance community.
I reenlisted three times during this time frame with two honorable discharges.  My final discharge was a General under Honorable circumstances.  I am writing this letter to appeal the final discharge in hopes of attaining an Honorable status.
On about October 8, 1997 I violated article 112A, wrongful use of a controlled substance, marijuana.  I could type an entire page with excuses why I made this grave error but will not waste your time.  It was very poor judgement on my part and I am deeply sorry to all for my inexplicable actions.
I was awarded non-judicial punishment as follows: Reduction to the next inferior pay grade, Petty Officer Second Class, 800.00 PPM for two months, restriction to Naval District Washington for 45 days, extra duty for 45 days.  I was attached to the Office of Naval Intelligence when this happened.
Once I completed my restriction, January 7, 1998 I requested an administrative board in hopes of retaining my enlistment.  On February 3, 1998 three Officers from ONI decided it was best to discharge me from active duty with a General under honorable circumstances.  I was released from active duty on April 15, 1998.
I started work with the Timeplex Group on April 20, 1998 five days later as a Field Engineer.  I was very honest with them regarding my discharge from the Navy.  I am doing the same work for them as I did in the Navy.  I set up telecommunications equipment for such companies as Citicorp/Citibank, Federal Reserve Bank, Mitre Corporation and the Baan Corporation to name a few.  I have attended 5 weeks of training in Clearwater, FL to further my education in the telecommunications industry.  I have completed 13 CBT's (computer based training), courses, each over 10 hours of study to enhance my knowledge in my field.
I have not touched marijuana since that time in October 1997 and will not touch it again.  The company I work for has a Government side to it as well, named the Federal Timeplex Group.  They work directly with the Government throughout the world.  I know I could be a greater asset in my field if I could be allowed to work again with the Government side of house as well as the commercial side I work with now.  This is why I am asking for the honorable discharge.  Please let me benefit the Government with my skills in the telecommunications field once again.  Sincerely,

Documentation

In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
Copy of DD Form 214 (Member 1 and 4)
Job/character reference
Forty-three pages from applicant's service record
Letter to applicant from Board for Correction of Naval Records dated July 12, 1999
Certificate of Completion from TimePlex Group dated Nov 30-Dec 18, 1998
Letter to applicant from TimePlex Group dated March 19, 1998
E-mail to applicant re: promotion dated August 19, 1999 with attachment

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Active:   USN			870311 - 910801	HON
		   USN			910802 - 970814	HON
	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	870217 - 870310	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  970815		Date of Discharge:  980415

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    00  08  01
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  35			Years Contracted:  3

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  74

Highest Rate:  CTM1

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  4.50 (2)	Behavior:  1.67 (3)		OTA:  2.48

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  JSAM, NAM (3), MUC, GCM (2), NDSM, AFSM, OSR (6), Letter of Commendation (2), NCM

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None

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

GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/MISCONDUCT, authority:  NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-146, formerly 3630620.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

971110:	NAVDRUGLAB, Jacksonville reports urine sample received 971103 tested positive for tetrahydrocannabinol.

971124:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 112A: Wrongfully use marijuana on 28Oct97.
	Award:  Forfeiture of $800 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to CTM2.  No indication of appeal in the record.

971209:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under Other Than Honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to Drug abuse as evidenced by CO's NJP of 24Nov97 for violating Article 112a, UCMJ, Wrongful use of marijuana.

971210:  	Applicant advised of his rights and having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ, Article 27B, elected to appear before an Administrative Discharge Board.

971210:	Drug and Alcohol Abuse Report: Marijuana abuse, unit sweep 971110, ashore off duty.  CAAC recommended separate not via VA hospital.  Commanding officer recommended separate not via VA hospital.

980107:	Medical evaluation for drug abuse found the applicant to be a drug abuser, not drug dependent.   CAAC recommends alcohol prevention education.

980204:	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).

980316:	Commanding officer recommended discharge General (under Honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct due to Drug abuse (Use). 

980402:	BUPERS directed the applicant's discharge General (under 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 980415 General (under 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 states he could be a greater asset in his field if he could be allowed to work with the government side of his current employer, which his existing discharge prevents him from accomplishing.  The NDRB is under no obligation to upgrade an individual’s discharge for the purpose of obtaining better employment.  The applicant’s discharge accurately characterizes his service to his country.  The discharge was proper and equitable.  Relief denied.

The following is provided for the applicant’s benefit.  There is no law or regulation that provides for the upgrade of an unfavorable discharge based solely on the passage of time or good conduct, subsequent to leaving military service.  The NDRB reviews the propriety (did the Navy follow its own rules in processing the applicant for discharge) and equity (did the applicant receive a discharge characterization in keeping with Navy guidance or was the characterization typical of other service members being separated for the same reason) of each applicant’s discharge to determine if proper procedures were followed.  This applicant’s discharge was proper and equitable.  Additionally, the NDRB is authorized to award clemency for post-service factors (what has the applicant done since discharge to become a contributing member of his/her community and to society in general).  Those factors include but are not limited to the following:  Evidence of continuing educational pursuits (transcripts, diploma, degree or vocational-technical certificates), a verifiable employment history (letter of recommendation from employer), documentation of community service (letter from activity/community group), certificate of non-involvement with civil authorities (police records check) and proof of not using drugs (detoxification certificate).  The applicant did not provide enough documentation of good character or conduct, which would warrant an upgrade to his discharge.  The applicant is encouraged to continue to establish a reputation of good character and document his accomplishments.  Documentation to support any claim of good character is a must to receive any consideration based on post-service achievements.  He remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, to discuss his post-service accomplishments, provided an application is received by the NDRB within fifteen years from the date of his discharge.  Legal representation at the hearing is advisable.

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