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

ex-BM3, USNR
Docket No. ND00-00009

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 991001, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable.  The applicant requested a personal appearance hearing before the Board in the Washington National Capital Region.  The applicant did not list any representative on the DD Form 293.  In the acknowledgement letter to the applicant, the applicant was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 000616.  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 4, Grade, Rate or Rank should read: “BMSN” vice “BM3”, Block 25, Separation Authority should read: “NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-146” vice “MILPERSMAN 3630600”, Block 26, Separation Code should read: “HKK” vice “HKQ”.  The original DD Form 214 should be corrected or reissued as appropriate. 

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues (verbatim)

1.  I believe the Commanding Officers decision to reverse the administrative board recommendation was unjust.  I do not believe he took time to "thoroughly" review the administrative board package.  If he had, he would have learned of my achievements and work ethic while on board the USS Briscoe.  He also would have learned about the Admin. Boards unanimous vote in my favor for retention.  I was promised an Honorable discharge, opportunity to re-enlist, and all benefits.  All I had to do was continue to serve my time honorably.  I held up my end of the agreement, why didn't the Navy?

I enlisted at the age of eighteen to serve my country as my family has for generations.  And also to mature and gain a promising future.  So why with such a good work record and clean conduct record I was condemned from the honor and future I hoped to gain from joining the Navy?

I would appreciate serious consideration from the members of the Board of Correction to upgrade my discharge to honorable.  This alone will help me to feel the honor and respect I was sure I had gained, along with the opportunity to continue my education to guarantee my success in the future.

Documentation

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

Copy of DD Form 214
Letter from applicant's mother
Character reference/letter from attorney in the United States Navy
Letter to United States Senate dated November 4, 1998
Memorandum from Commanding Officer dated June 6, 1997
Memorandum form Operations Officer dated March 19, 1998
Memorandum from First Lieutenant dated March 6, 1998
Memorandum from BMC(SW) dated March 10, 1998
Copy of potential character witness questionnaire dated March 11, 1998 (2), and March 12, 1998
Memorandum from Leading MS dated March 7, 1998
Character reference dated May 12, 1999
Character reference dated June 3, 1999
Character reference from pastor, St. Matthias Lutheran Church
Police record check from county of Greenville dated June 16, 1999
Enrollment certification letter for Tri County Technical College dated May 13, 1999

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Active:   None
	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	941227 - 950822	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  950823		Date of Discharge:  980821

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    02  11  29
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  18			Years Contracted:  8

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  80

Highest Rate:  BMSN

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  3.25 (4)	Behavior:  3.00 (4)		OTA:  3.34	5.0 evals

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  NDSM, NER, 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:

951208:	Applicant informed of United States Navy and USS BRISCOE policy on drug abuse.

980224:	NAVDRUGLAB, Jacksonville, FL reported urine sample received 980217 tested positive for tetrahydrocannabinol.

980226:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 112A: Wrongful use of a controlled substance on 1044, 2Feb98, to wit: marijuana.
	Award:  Forfeiture of $569 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 30 days, remove frocking from BM3 to BMSN.  No indication of appeal in the record.

980303:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.

980303:  	Applicant advised of his rights and having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to appear before an Administrative Discharge Board.

980424:	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, and recommended retention.

980429:	Commanding officer recommended disapproval of retention and recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse (use). 

980709:	CNP recommends approval of general (under honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse (use).

980805:	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 980821 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 response to applicant’s issue 1, the Board found that the applicant’s service record was commendable, however, the applicant did violate UCMJ Article 112a for wrongful use of a controlled substance.  It must be noted that most Sailors serve honorably and well, and therefore, earn their honorable discharges.  The applicant's service is accurately characterized as having been performed under general conditions.  Relief is not warranted.

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 view DoD Directive 1332.28 and other Decisional Documents by going online at "afls14.jag.af.mil".

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
		720 Kennon Street SE Rm 309
		Washington Navy Yard DC  20374-5023