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

 ex-AOAR, USNR
Docket No. ND00-00801

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 000612, 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 001206.  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 (verbatim)

1.  My DD-214 states that I entered service April 11, 88, when in all actuality I entered service April 11, 1987 which would give me 2 years and approximately 6 months of active duty.

2.  My discharge was inequitable because it was based on only one isolated incident in 30 months of service with no other adverse action.  And although I was found guilty of substance abuse it was only usage of a controlled substance.  I was a young man of age 21 years old and my drug usage was only in a recreational and experimental stage, some that most of us were using seldom and on a non-regular basis.

3.  It appears to me that by me being a first-time offender of drug use, I should have at least been given or offered an opportunity to attend some type of substance abuse workshop or program to educate me on the down fails, mental and physical damage that drug and substance use sooner or later leads to: to my knowledge many of my peers with reoccuring drug problems were given those opportunities that myself was not even considered for or offered.

4.  I feel that if I had been given that one opportunity I would have without a doubt finished the programing successfully, and then been able to complete my time in service my country under nothing less than honorable conditions.  I also would have been able to continue and fulfill my dreams and ambitions of becoming Chief, Master Chief, Senior Chief, and a career sailor...Thank you for your time and consideration in this very important, and life changeing matter.  Sincerly

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: None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  871218		Date of Discharge:  891003

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    01  05  23
	Inactive:  00  03  25

Age at Entry:  19			Years Contracted:  8

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  27

Highest Rate:  AOAA

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  3.20 (1)	Behavior:  2.80 (1)		OTA:  3.00

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:

880411:	Applicant ordered to active duty for 36 months in the Active Mariner Program.

880413:	Applicant briefed on Navy's policy on drug and alcohol abuse.

880503:	Retention Warning:  Advised of deficiency (4th Class Swimmer qualified.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning. 

890721:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 112A: Wrongful use of marijuana between 22May89 and 20Jun89.
	Award: Forfeiture of $391 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to AOAR.  No indication of appeal in the record.

890721:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under Other Than Honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to Commission of a serious offense and misconduct due to Drug abuse.

890721:  	Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ, Article 27B, elected to waive all rights.

890722:	Drug and Alcohol Abuse Report: Marijuana abuse.  Random urinalysis 890701.  Physician found applicant not dependent and recommended separate not via VA hospital.  Commanding officer recommended separate not via VA hospital.  Comments: No potential for future naval service.

890724:	Medical evaluation for drug abuse found the applicant to be an episodic abuser of marijuana/alcohol, not dependent.

890801:	Commanding officer recommended discharge under Other Than Honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to Drug abuse (Use). 

890811:	CNMPC directed the applicant's discharge under Other Than Honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to Drug abuse (Use).

890913:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 112A: Wrongful use of a controlled substance on 30Aug89, to wit: cocaine.
Award:  Forfeiture of $349 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days.  No indication of appeal in the record.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 891003 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).

Issue 1.  The Board determined this issue is without merit.  The record shows the applicant enlisted into the reserves in 1987 but did not start his active duty time until April 1988.  The D 214 reflects only active duty time.  No action required.

Issue 2.  The Board determined this issue is without merit.  The applicant claims his discharge was inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident in 30 months of service with no other adverse action.  The applicant tested positive for drug abuse on two occasions and was found guilty at two NJPs for drug abuse (890721and 890913).  The discharge was proper and equitable.  Relief denied.

Issue 3.  The Board determined this issue is without merit.  The applicant states he should have been given or offered an opportunity to attend some type of substance abuse workshop.  The applicant was evaluated not to be drug dependent but only a drug user.  The Navy is under no obligation to provide drug treatment to an individual that is not drug dependent.  Relief denied.

Issue 4.  The Board determined this issue is without merit.  The applicant states if he had been given that one opportunity, he would have without a doubt finished the program successfully and then been able to complete his time in service to his country.  The applicant did not provide any evidence to support his claim.  In July 89, he tested positive for marijuana use.  In September 89, the applicant tested positive for cocaine use.  The applicant showed no indication that he intended to end his drug abuse habits, but instead added to his drug abuse resume by experimenting with other illegal drugs.  Relief denied.

The applicant remains eligible for a person appearance hearing, provided an application is received at the NDRB within fifteen years from the date of his discharge.
 
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