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

  ex-AR, USN
Docket No. ND03-00207

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 20021121, 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 20030926.  After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the Applicant’s service was discovered by the NDRB.  The Board’s vote was unanimous that the character of the discharge shall not change.  The discharge shall remain: UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-140 (formerly 3630600).

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as submitted

1.	I am writing this summary to request an upgrade of my discharge from other than
 honorable” to” general under honorable conditions”.  Please review the following issues to support my request to upgrade my discharge to “general under honorable conditions”. 

I was discharged from the US Navy for unauthorized absence and failing a random drug screen.  Since my separation from the armed forces, I have attended and completed an in-patient drug treatment program and now attend AA meetings regularly.  As a result, I have been clean and sober for some time now.

The reason I request an upgrade is for possible reenlistment into the active branch of the US Navy.  Also for possible future employment for civil service jobs or other federal, state or government jobs.

Thank you for your time and attention to this matter.

Sincerely,

Documentation

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

None

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	981019 – 981214	COG
	Active:   None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  981215		Date of Discharge:  990813

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    00  07  09
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  23			Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  10			AFQT:  49

Highest Rate:  AR

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  NMF		Behavior:  NMF		OTA:  NMF

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  None

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  14

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT, authority:  NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-140 (formerly 3630600).

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

990330:	NAVDRUGLAB, GREAT LAKES, IL, reported applicant’s urine sample, received 990325, tested positive for THC and cocaine.

990421:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86:  Unauthorized Absence 14 days.
	Award: Forfeiture of $450 per month for 1 month, restriction and extra duty for 30 days.  No indication of appeal in the record.

990421:	Retention Warning:  Advised of deficiency (Unauthorized Absence), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning. 

990719:	NAVDRUGLAB, JACKSONVILLE, FL, reported applicant’s urine sample, received 990712, tested positive for THC.

990727:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 112A (3 specs):  (1) Wrongful use of an undetermined amount of cocaine as confirmed in urinalysis testing by Naval Drug Laboratory, Great Lakes, Illinois, dated 990330; (2) Wrongful use of undetermined amount of marijuana as confirmed in urinalysis testing by Naval Drug Laboratory, Great Lakes, Illinois, dated 990330; (3) Wrongful use of an undetermined amount of marijuana as confirmed in urinalysis testing by Naval Drug Laboratory, Jacksonville, Florida, dated 990719.
	Award: Forfeiture of $450 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days.  No indication of appeal in the record.
	
970729:	Chronological Record of Medical Care entry from Recruit Training Facility – NAS Florida: Chart reviewed, patient interviewed.  Concur with diagnosis of drug abuse and recommend patient not put into treatment.  No risk for withdrawal.

990806:	Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct, and drug abuse.

990806:	Chief of Naval Education and Training directed the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.

	Partial discharge package missing.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 19990813 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct (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).

In the Applicant’s issue 1, the Board found:  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.  However, the NDRB is authorized to consider outstanding post-service factors in the re-characterization of a discharge, 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.  Verifiable proof of any post-service accomplishments must be provided in order for the Applicant to claim post-service conduct and behavior as a reason to upgrade a less than honorable discharge.  Evidence of continuing educational pursuits, a positive employment record, a drug-free lifestyle, and certification of community service and non-involvement with civil authorities are examples of verifiable proof that can be submitted.   The Board appreciates the Applicant’s efforts to improve his life and his involvement in regularly attended AA meetings and encourages him to continue his participation.  At this time, the Applicant has not provided sufficient verifiable documentation of good character and conduct to mitigate his misconduct while on active duty.  Relief is 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 discharge.  The Applicant can provide additional documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments at that time.  Representation at a personal appearance hearing is recommended but not required.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 18, effective
12 Dec 1997 until 21 Aug 2002, Article 1910-140 (formerly 3630600), SEPARATION BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT - PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT.

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