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

ex-ADAN, USN
Docket No. ND99-01020

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 990726, 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 designate a 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.

The NDRB did note an administrative error on the original DD Form 214.  Block 25, Separation Authority, should read "1910-146" vice 1910-140", and Block 28, Narrative Reason for Separation, should read:  “MISCONDUCT” vice “MISCONDUCT - DRUG ABUSE”.  The original DD Form 214 should be corrected or reissued as appropriate. 

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

1.  On the 15 Oct 98 I was discharged from the United States Navy under General (Honorable Conditions).  I made the mistake of trying a drug for the first time and because of my actions, I was discharged.  It was a mistake that I wish to change but I can't.  If any further questions of my actions, please contact:  
Mr. J_, 
Alcohol Treatment Program
Mental Health Department
Naval Hospital
Oak Harbor, WA 98278-2900

I ask the board to review my service record to consider my character of service prior to my actions.  What I did was wrong and I am taking responsibility for it.  I can say in my heart, I served my country with pride and wish that I can still serve.  In two years of service, I gained respect from all my peers.  Taking pride in my job and country.  You can see this by my records of the number of awards received.  Please allow me to be able to receive an Honorable Discharge so I may go on knowing I served with honor.  To be asked to leave in disgrace caused by my own hands is a hard punishment.  Please allow my punishment to end by knowing I served with honor and not forgotten because of my mistake.  If there is any more information I can provide please contact me. 

Documentation

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

Copy of DD Form 214

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Active:    None
	Inactive:  USNR (DEP)	951024 - 960505	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  960506		Date of Discharge:  981015

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    02  05  10
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  19			Years Contracted:  4 

Education Level:  09			AFQT:  35

Highest Rate:  ADAN

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  NMF		Behavior:  NMF		OTA:  NMF

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  Flag LOC(2), SSDR

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:

970805:	Mental Health, Clinic, 35th Med Gp, Misawa AB, Japan:  Diagnoses:  
		Axis I:  V62.89 Life Circumstance Problem
		Rule out:  300.23 Social Phobia
		Rule out:  300.00 Anxiety Disorder NOS
		Axis II:  V799.9 Diagnosis deferred.
		Axis III:  None.
Axis IV:  First overseas tour; history of anxiety symptoms in general and especially when compelled to take "written exams"
Axis V:  GAF: 75
Plan:  Pt agreed to RTC to complete psychometric questionnaires to facilitate assessment and treatment planning.  In addition, pt agreed to schedule an appointment with the clinic's psychiatrist to evaluate the potential efficacy of medication to ameliorate symptoms.

970807:	Mental Health Clinic, 35 Medical Group:  Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder - mixed type.  States that he has also "been told that I have anxiety and that's what my problem is".  Discussed treatment  options.  Denies suicidal/homicidal/paranoid ideation.  
Plan:  Obtain baseline labs, EKG.  To begin Ritalin 10mg bid.  Squadron notified.  Follow-up 10-14 days.

980928:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct  - drug abuse and misconduct - commission of a serious offense as evidenced by testing positive on random urinalysis.

980928:	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.

980930:	Mental Health Dept, Naval Hospital, Oak Harbor:  This 21 year old single male referred for assessment for substance abuse or dependency due to pt positive urinalysis on medical, here for check to see if he needs treatment prior to discharge.  Pt states he only smoked marijuana once - took some of his Dads medical marijuana at home once.  Drug use history:  Marijuana one time at age of 21.  Denies pre-service use of any drugs ever.
	Diagnosis:
	Axis I: (1) Attention Deficient Disorder - under treatment. (2) 1 episode marijuana abuse.
	Recommendation:  Returned to command with no action by ATP.  Recommend ADSEP under zero tolerance policy for drug abuse if command desires.

981007:	CO, VP-40 directed the applicant's discharge with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse (use).  Commanding Officer's comments:  "AD3 (Applicant)'s drug abuse is intolerable and not compatible with military service."

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 981015 with a 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).

Responding to the applicant’s issue, the Board found nothing in the records, nor did the applicant provide anything to indicate or to show that there exists an error of fact, law, procedure, or discretion, associated with his discharge at the time of issuance, and that his rights were prejudiced thereby.  It is the Board’s opinion that the applicant should be held responsible for his misconduct..  Relief is therefore denied.

The following is provided for the applicant’s edification.  The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge.  The applicant must be aware that 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 the civilian life subsequent to leaving the service.  Normally, to permit relief, an error or injustice must have been found to have existed during the period of enlistment in question.  Outstanding post-service conduct, 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, may be considered by the NDRB.  The applicant is reminded that he is eligible for a personal appearance hearing provided the application is received within 15 years from the date of discharge.  Representation at personal appearance hearing is highly recommended.

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