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

 ex-EWSR, USN
Docket No. ND02-00267

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 020114, 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 020815.  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, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630620.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as submitted

1.  My discharge was inequitable because it was based on an incident which happened within the last 2 months of the end of my military service.  I had served my country for over 2 yrs. prior to this incident faithfully and with prosperity with many accomplishments. When I first joined the U.S. Navy, Although I only signed up for a 4 yr. Term My "High Hopes" were to reenlist after 4 yrs and make it my career.  I signed up for the low term (4 yrs.) so I could make sure that I wanted to make it my career, and not be over-committed to a career that I didn't want.  During my 1st 26 months in the Navy, commitments to the Navy and to my Primary Specialty (EWT) were my highest priority, Even over my family!  After successfully completing boot camp and finishing 4th in my class in EW "A" school in Pensacola, FL., I had nothing but good reports on evaluations, and I wasn't involved in any problems, within the U.S. Navy, at any station.  (See section 13 on my DD 214 copy for accomplishment, Decorations, etc.)  It wasn't until about the 26th month of my military service, that unfair treatment towards not only me, but other sailors also, at my command (USS DENVER LPD-9), ruined my love for being in the U.S. Navy!  After my request to change commands was denied.  I requested to be discharged, and it was denied.  In the attempt to cope with the stress of being at a command that I now hated, I tried some drugs one night at a party, and later tested positive on the urinalysis.  Up until that point (I requested to be discharged, and it was denied), I had never and would have never done anything to jeopardize my future with the U.S. Navy.  These are my Reasons/Issues for requesting an upgrade from OTHER THAN HONORABLE discharge to HONORABLE Discharge.  If my request is Honored, Please send me Brochures, Literature, info, etc., concerning benefits or services, that I can take advantage of.  Thank you for your time and may God Bless you and your families!

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: USNR (DEP)	911104 - 920726	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  920727		Date of Discharge:  950217

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    02  06  21
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  25			Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  77

Highest Rate:  EWSN

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  3.20 (2)	Behavior:  3.20 (2)		OTA:  3.30

Military Decorations:  None

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

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  18

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/MISCONDUCT, authority:  NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630620.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

940901:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Dereliction of duties on 1Sep94.
	Award: Restriction and extra duty for 10 days, reduction to EWSA.  Reduction suspended for 6 months.  No indication of appeal in the record.

950116:	Applicant to unauthorized absence 1200 6Jan95.

950125:	Applicant from unauthorized absence 0950, 25Jan95 (18 days/ surrendered).

950124:	Vacate reduction to EWSA awarded at CO's NJP dated 1Sep94.

950126:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence, violation of UCMJ, Article 112A: Wrongful use of a controlled substance.
	Award: Restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to EWSR.  No indication of appeal in the record.

Undated:	Medical evaluation for drug abuse found the applicant to be a drug abuser, not drug dependent.  [Extracted from CO's message dated 31Jan95.]

950126:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.  [Extracted from CO's message dated 31Jan95.]

950126:	Applicant advised of her rights and having elected not to consult 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.  [Extracted from CO's message dated 31Jan95.]

950131:	Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse (use).

950209:	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 950217 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 Applicant claims her discharge was inequitable because it was based upon an incident that happened within the last 2 months of the end of her military service.  The Applicant’s service is marred by receipt of non-judicial punishment (NJP) on two separate occasions for dereliction of duty, unauthorized absence and wrongful use of a controlled substance.  The Applicant is reminded that she had contracted for four years of service, she did not complete her initial obligated service due to her use of illegal drugs.  Drug abuse warranted processing for separation, normally under other than honorable conditions.  The discharge was proper and equitable.  Relief denied.

Issue 2:  The receipt of commendatory awards and favorable performance evaluations during the Applicant’s tour does not guarantee her an honorable discharge.  The Board disagrees with the Applicant’s assertion that her overall service record warrants an honorable discharge.  The Applicant’s performance prior to her drug use does not mitigate her use of illegal drugs.  The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of her service, reflects her willful disobedience of the orders and directives that regulate good order and discipline in the naval service, her disregard for the Navy’s Zero Tolerance Policy on Drugs, and falls short of that required for an honorable characterization of service.  An upgrade to honorable would be inappropriate.  Relief denied.

Issue 3:  There is nothing in the record to substantiate the Applicant’s charges of unfair treatment at her command.  The NDRB recognizes that serving in the Navy is very challenging.  Our country is fortunate to have men and women willing to endure the hardships and sacrifices required in order to serve their country.  It must be noted that most Sailors serve honorably and well and therefore earn honorable discharges.  The NDRB found the Applicant’s service record devoid of any mitigating or extenuating circumstances to offset the seriousness of the offense for which the discharge was awarded.  Relief not warranted.

The Applicant’s discharge characterization accurately reflects her service to her country.  The discharge was proper and equitable.  Normally, to permit relief, an error or injustice must have existed during the period of enlistment in question.  No such error or injustice occurred during the Applicant’s enlistment.  Additionally, 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 civilian life, subsequent to leaving the service.  Relief not warranted.

The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of her discharge.  Representation at a personal appearance hearing is recommended but not required. 

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  Navy Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 9/94, effective 
22 Jul 94 until 02 Oct 96, 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