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

 ex-SR, USN
Docket No. ND00-00452
 
Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 000224, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions.  The applicant requested a personal appearance before the Traveling Panel closest to Eugene, OR.  The applicant listed a civilian counsel as his 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 000918.  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 – Drug abuse (Use), authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630620.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

1.  Upgrade characterization to honorable or general under honorable.

2. Change basis for separation to Convenience of the Gov't with the appropriate separation code.

3.  Change the reenlistment code to RE-2.

4.  Clemency is warranted because it is an injustice for me to continue to suffer the adverse consequences of a bad discharge.

5.  My average conduct and efficiency ratings/behavior and proficiency marks were good [or pretty good].

6. I have been a good citizen since my discharge.

7.  My record of NJPs/Article 15s indicates the offense for which I was discharged.

8.  My ability to serve was impaired by my youth and immaturity.

9.  My ability to serve was impaired by my deprived background.

10. Personal problems impaired my ability to serve.

11. My use of alcohol impaired my ability to serve.

12. Other:  I was never offered rehabilitation treatment at a Navy treatment facility prior to discharge or during processing.

Documentation

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

Statement from applicant
Character reference
Job/character reference from Production Coordinator dated February 14, 2000
Character reference from pastor of College Crest dated February 15, 2000
Copy of certificate of completion for Level 2 Outpatient Chemical Dependency Treatment dated July 3, 1997
Copy of DD Form 214 (2 copies)

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Active:   None
	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	900306 - 900320	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  900321		Date of Discharge:  900816

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    00  04  26
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  17			Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  45

Highest Rate:  SR

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  NOB		Behavior:  1.0			OTA:  NOB

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  None 

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/Misconduct – Drug abuse (Use), authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630620.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

900322:	Applicant briefed on Navy's policy on drug and alcohol abuse.

900717:	Drug and Alcohol Abuse Report: Cocaine abuse.  Urinalysis  900606 (other inspection).  Physician found applicant not dependent and recommended separate not via VA hospital.  Commanding officer recommended separate not via VA hospital.

900703:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 112A: Wrongfully use cocaine on 0900, 900606.
	Award:  Forfeiture of $334 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days.  No indication of appeal in the record.

900723:	Medical evaluation: Alcohol use confirmed, drug use uncertain.  Recommend separate

900816:	DD Form 214: Applicant discharged under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse (use).

Discharge package missing.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 900816 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 first issue states:  “Upgrade characterization to honorable or general under honorable.”  The NDRB reviewed the applicant’s service record and post service documentation and found the characterization was proper and equitable (C and D).  The Board found that the applicant’s misconduct (Drug Use) outweighed the other aspects of his service.  Relief is not warranted.

The applicant’s second issue states:  “Change basis for separation to Convenience of the Gov't with the appropriate separation code.”  The NDRB found the basis, or narrative reason for separation, Misconduct-Drug Abuse, to accurately describe the reason for separation.  To change the reason would be inappropriate.  Similarly, the separation code, HKK, is appropriate for the applicant’s discharge due to drug use.  Relief is not warranted.

The applicant’s third issue states:  “Change the reenlistment code to RE-2.”  Concerning a change in reenlistment code, the NDRB has no authority to change reenlistment codes or make recommendations to permit reentry into the naval service or any other of the Armed Forces.  The NDRB has no jurisdiction over reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Navy.  Reenlistment policy of the naval service is promulgated by the Bureau of Naval Personnel, Pers-282, 5720 Integrity Drive, Millington, TN 38055.  Neither a less than fully honorable discharge nor an unfavorable "RE" code is, in itself, a bar to reenlistment.  A request for a waiver is normally done only during the processing of a formal application for enlistment through a recruiter.  Relief, is therefore, denied.

The applicant’s fourth issue states:  “Clemency is warranted because it is an injustice for me to continue to suffer the adverse consequences of a bad discharge.”  The NDRB found the applicant’s discharge was within the regulations.  The character and reason for discharge appropriately reflect the applicant’s service.  The NDRB found no injustice in the applicant’s discharge.  Relief is denied.

The applicant’s fifth issue states:  “My average conduct and efficiency ratings/behavior and proficiency marks were good [or pretty good].”  The NDRB found the applicant’s final trait averages (1.0) substandard and below standards for consideration for an Honorable discharge.  The NDRB did consider the equity of the discharge based on the applicant’s length of service, misconduct, and post service documentation and found the characterization appropriate.  Relief is not warranted.

The applicant’s sixth issue states:  “I have been a good citizen since my discharge.”  The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the re characterization of a discharge.  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’s seventh issue states:  “My record of NJPs/Article 15s indicates the offense for which I was discharged.”  The NDRB found this issue irrelevant.  Relief is not warranted.

The applicant’s eighth issue states:  “My ability to serve was impaired by my youth and immaturity.”  The Board found that the applicant’s age, education level, and test scores qualified him for enlistment.  While he may feel his immaturity was a factor that contributed to his action, the record clearly reflects his willful disregard for the requirements of military discipline and demonstrated that he was unfit for further service.  The record is devoid of evidence that the applicant was not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions.  Relief is denied.

The applicant’s ninth issue states:  “My ability to serve was impaired by my deprived background.”  The NDRB found the applicant fully qualified for service at the time of enlistment.  The NDRB found nothing in the record to demonstrate that the applicant was somehow not responsible for his actions.  Relief is denied.

The applicant’s tenth issue states:  “Personal problems impaired my ability to serve.”  There is nothing in the record to show that the applicant was not responsible for his actions.  The NDRB found that the applicant was appropriately held accountable for his misconduct –Drug Use.  Relief is denied.

The applicant’s eleventh issue states:  “My use of alcohol impaired my ability to serve.”  While the applicant states his use of alcohol impaired his ability to serve he was no less responsible for his actions and therefore appropriately held accountable.  Relief denied. 

The applicant’s twelfth issue states:  “I was never offered rehabilitation treatment at a Navy treatment facility prior to discharge or during processing.”  The applicant was evaluated by a physician and found not dependant, therefore no offer for rehabilitation was made.  Relief is not warranted.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  Navy Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560A), Change 6, effective 11 Jan 89 until 13 Jun 90, 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 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