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

ex-BM3, USN
Docket No. ND01-00138

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 001113, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions.  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 010719.  After a thorough review of the records, 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.  The reason for my discharge was due to drug abuse.  I would like to state that the reason that I used drugs was to self-medicate.  I felt the need to self-medicate because of my prior Vietnam Service.  I was involved in combat actions aboard the destroyer, USS Goldsboro in 1972 off the coast of North Vietnam.  We fired nightly on the North Vietnamese Coast.  On one occasion, we were hit by enemy fire and some sailors were killed.  At any rate, this stress led to my abuse of drugs.  Please upgrade my discharge.

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:   USN			720110 - 750108	HON
		   USN			750109 - 810114	HON
	Inactive: USNR-R		811009 - 820122	HON
		   USNR (DEP)	820525 - 820601	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  820602		Date of Discharge:  870218

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    04  08  17
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  18			Years Contracted:  4 (12 months extension)

Education Level:  9			AFQT:  25

Highest Rate:  BM2

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  3.80 (4)	Behavior:  3.55 (4)		OTA:  3.65

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  SSDR(3RD), NEM, MUC, NDSM, VSMw1*, VCM 

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:

850808:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 112a: Wrongful use of a controlled substance (positive urinalysis for THC).
	Award:  Forfeiture of $300.00 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to E-4.  No indication of appeal in the record.

850821:	DAAR indicates substance abuse counselor found applicant not dependent, is amenable, recommended for Level I Treatment.

860612:	UA 0730, 860612 to 0112, 860613 (1day/S).

861223:	Medical evaluation for drug abuse found the applicant to be a drug abuser not drug dependent, but is assessed to have a psychological dependency on alcohol.

861201:	Applicant tests positive on urinalysis for THC.

861230:	DAAR indicates medical officer found applicant not dependent, not amenable, recommended for separation from service not via VA Hospital.

870109:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.

870109:  	Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights.

870115:	Commanding officer recommended discharge general (under honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse (use).  Commanding officer’s comments (verbatim):  Suspecting extensive drug use after a port visit to Malaga, Spain, an area noted for availibility of marijuana and hashish, we conducted a command directed urinalysis screening of deck department personnel.  (Applicant) was one of several men who screened positive for THC use.  This is his second drug related infraction of the UCMJ and although his service to the Navy has been meritorious, it does not warrant further exemption from the ‘zero tolerance’ directive.  Since his more recent drug abuse is solely evidenced by a command directed urinalysis, I recommend a general discharge.

870125:	CNMPC 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 870218 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, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper and equitable (C and D).

In response to the applicant’s issue, the Board found that the applicant’s naval service was excellent, however, the Board must support the Navy’s ‘zero tolerance’ directive towards those who use illegal drugs.  The applicant twice tested positive for THC use and has submitted no evidence that he has discontinued his use of illegal substances.  This issue does not serve to provide a foundation upon which the Board can grant relief.

The following is provided for the applicant’s edification.  The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge.  However, 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, is considered.  The applicant did not provide any documentation of his post-service.  The applicant's efforts need to be more encompassing than those provided.  The applicant should have produced evidence of continuing educational pursuits, a verifiable employment record, documentation of community service, certification of non-involvement with civil authorities and proof of his not using drugs in order for consideration for clemency based on post-service conduct.  He is encouraged to continue with his pursuits and is reminded that he is eligible for a personal appearance hearing provided the application is received prior to18 February 2002.  Relief is not warranted.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  Navy Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560), Change 7/86, effective 
15 Dec 86 until 14 Jun 87, 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 "afls10.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