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

 ex-AA, USN
Docket No. ND99-01021

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 list any representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 000417.  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.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

1.  I, (applicant), do respectfully request that you, the board, to review my discharge and consider an upgrade.  I can honestly say that I was in the wrong place, at the wrong time.  I realize the mistake, I put myself into, and strive to improve my life for myself, wife and daughter.  I have considered returning to school, with the hopes and goals of receiving my Basic Law Enforcement Training Certification.  I have considered applying with US Customs, US immigrations, the US department of Agriculture and the US Airforce.  This upgrade is a very important step in achieving these goals and I hope you will reconsider my discharge.  Thank you for your time and consideration.

Documentation

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

Copy of DD Form 214 (5 copies)
Job/character reference from Line Services Manager, Customer Service Manager, Marketing Director dated July 14, 1999

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Active:   None
	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	920616 - 920621	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  920622		Date of Discharge:  940923

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    02  03  02
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  20			Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  42

Highest Rate:  AN

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  4.00 (3)	Behavior:  4.00 (3)		OTA:  4.00

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  NDSM, SSDR, BEA

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:

920725:	Applicant briefed on Navy policy on drug and alcohol abuse.

940805:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 112A: Wrongfully use marijuana on 14 July 1994.
	Award:  Forfeiture of $100 per month for 1 month, restriction for 60 days, reduction to AA, oral admonition and reprimand.  No indication of appeal in the record.

940824:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse as evidenced by your nonjudicial punishment on 5 Aug 94.

940824:  	Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights.

940829:	Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse (use) and commission of a serious offense.  Commanding officer’s comments (verbatim): All counseling requirements were met in accordance with Naval Military Personnel Manual, Chapter 36.  Airman (applicant) was aware of the United States Navy's policy of zero tolerance with regard to the use of controlled substances.  Despite this knowledge of Navy policy, Airman (applicant) openly admitted using marijuana while on active duty.  Although Airman (applicant) tested negative on two separate urinalysis', his free and open admission of drug use, without remorse, has left this command with no other viable option than to seek an administrative discharge to maintain good order and discipline.  The fact that Airman (applicant) did not take his responsibilities as a plane captain seriously, possibly placed the lives of aircrew in jeopardy.  It is therefore my strongest recommendation that Airman (applicant) be discharged with an OTHER THAN HONORABLE discharge.
 
940915:	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 940923 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 issue states:  “I, (applicant), do respectfully request that you, the board, to review my discharge and consider an upgrade.  I can honestly say that I was in the wrong place, at the wrong time.  I realize the mistake, I put myself into, and strive to improve my life for myself, wife and daughter.  I have considered returning to school, with the hopes and goals of receiving my Basic Law Enforcement Training Certification.  I have considered applying with US Customs, US immigrations, the US department of Agriculture and the US Airforce.  This upgrade is a very important step in achieving these goals and I hope you will reconsider my discharge.  Thank you for your time and consideration.”

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.  Navy Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 9/94, effective 
22 Jul 94 until 02 Oct 96, Article 3630620, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED MEMBERS BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT DUE TO 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