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

 ex-PNSR, USN
Docket No. ND00-00872

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 000629, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable.  The applicant requested a personal appearance hearing before a traveling panel closest to Phoenix, AX.  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 010125.  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.  My discharge was inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident in 28 months of service.

The Navy or rather the HMC aboard USS Merrill DD-976 would not help me in getting the proper care for my injuries sustained while in active service or help me in attaining a medical review in which a Honorable medical discharge could have been given to me.

I was forced to take the other than Honorable discharge by the MAA of the USS Merrill-DD-976 who said no one can help me or would care to help me.

Documentation

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

Letter to Department of Veterans Affairs dated September 17, 1993 from applicant
Letter from Department of Veterans Affairs dated October 18, 1994 to applicant

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Active:   None
	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	891222 - 900731	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  900801		Date of Discharge:  920330

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    01  08  00
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  18			Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  61

Highest Rate:  PNSA

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  3.80 (1)	Behavior:  3.80 (1)		OTA:  3.60

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  NDSM, JMU

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:

900802:	You are being retained in the Naval service, despite your defective enlistment and induction due to fraudulent entry into naval service as evidenced by your failure to disclose your pre service civil involvement:  Speeding ticket July 1990 (two).  However, any further deficiencies in performance or conduct may result in processing for administrative separation.

911203:	Applicant briefed on Navy's policy of drug and alcohol abuse.

920214:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 112A: Use of a controlled substance, to wit: marijuana.
	Award: Forfeiture of $392 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to PNSR.  No indication of appeal in the record.

920219:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.

920303:  	Applicant advised of his rights and having consulted 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.

920304:	Misconduct Warning:  Advised of pending separation.  Notified further misconduct could result in Court Martial.
 
920316:	Substance Abuse Screen: Cannabis misuse - isolated incident by positive urinalysis.

920321:	Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse (use).

920326:	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 920330 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:  “My discharge was inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident in 28 months of service.”  The NDRB found this issue without merit.  The applicant’s misconduct outweighed his otherwise credible service.  Relief is denied.

The applicant’s second issue states:  “The Navy or rather the HMC aboard USS Merrill DD-976 would not help me in getting the proper care for my injuries sustained while in active service or help me in attaining a medical review in which a Honorable medical discharge could have been given to me.”  The NDRB found no impropriety in the applicant’s discharge for misconduct.  The NDRB has no authority to change a discharge to “medical.”
Relief is not warranted.

The applicant’s third issue states:  “I was forced to take the other than Honorable discharge by the MAA of the USS Merrill-DD-976 who said no one can help me or would care to help me.”  The record shows the applicant was properly advised of his rights during the discharge proceedings.  Relief is not warranted.

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 failed to provide any post service documentation for the Board’s consideration.

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), effective 15 Aug 91 until 04 Mar 93, 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