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

 ex-FA, USN 
Docket No. ND03-00257

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20021203.  The Applicant requests that the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions.  The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review.  The Applicant did not list any representative on the DD Form 293.  Subsequent to the application, the Applicant obtained representation by the American Legion.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20031114.  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/MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-146, formerly Article 3630620.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

“1.  My discharge was inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident in the 24 months of service with no evidence saying I did what I did except for my statement I passed my Drug tests and with no other adverse action I was reworded 45 days restriction to the USS George Washington CVN 73 and 45 days extra duty and $150 times 2 for two months and OTH Discharge.  I feel my punishment was a little excessive.  Please take in consideration that it was my 1st offence.  Thank you.”

Additional issues submitted by Applicant’s counsel/representative (American Legion):

“2.  (Equity Issue)  This former member further requests that the Board include provisions of SECNAVINST 5420.174C, enclosure (1), Chapter 9, as it pertains to post-service conduct, in assessing the merits of this application.”

Documentation

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

Applicant’s DD Form 214 (Member 1 and 4)
Navy Recruiting Manual-Enlisted page 5-51
Thirteen pages from Applicant’s service record

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	000421 - 000425	COG
	Active:   None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  000426		Date of Discharge:  020422

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    01  11  27
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  20			Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  43

Highest Rate:  FN

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  NMF			Behavior:  NMF		OTA:  NMF

Military Decorations:  None

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

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  2

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/MISCONDUCT, authority:  NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-146, formerly 3630620.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

020330:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence on 020318-020320, violation of UCMJ, Article 112A: Wrongfully use of controlled substance on November 2001, to wit: marijuana.
	Award: Forfeiture of $649 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to FA.  No indication of appeal in the record.

020401:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse as evidenced by his Commanding Officer’s nonjudicial punishment on 30 March 2002, for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Article 112a, wrongful use of marijuana on or about November 2001.

020401:	Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights.

020405:	Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse (use).  Commanding Officer’s comments (verbatim):  [This is a particularly sad case.  FA S_ (Applicant) joined our Navy to, in his own words, make something of his life.  For almost two years on board GEORGE WASHINGTON he succeeded.  Unfortunately, during a drug investigation FA S_ admitted to smoking marijuana at a party.  FA S_ was fully aware of the Navy’s policy on drugs and of the dangers of drug use.  His willful use of marijuana illustrates his total disregard for the impact his actions have on his shipmates and himself.  His behavior is not compatible with the good order and discipline of the service.  His inability to conform to the standards and requirements of the Navy leave me no alternative but to recommend that FA S_ be separated from the Naval service with an other than honorable discharge.]

020407:	COMCRUDESGRU TWO 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 20020422 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 states his discharge was based on one isolated incident in “24 months.”  Even though the civilian world treats some offenses with leniency because they are a first time incident on an otherwise clear record, the military does not view such offenses as minor infractions to maintain proper order and discipline.  The Applicant’s service record is marred by award of non-judicial punishment (NJP) for illegal drug use, thus substantiating the misconduct for which he was separated.  Drug abuse warranted processing for separation, normally under other than honorable conditions.  In the Applicant’s case, the Board could discern no impropriety or inequity and therefore considered his discharge proper and equitable.   Relief denied. 

Issue 2:  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 recharacterization 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.   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.  The Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 33, effective 16 Jul 2001 until 21 Aug 2002, Article 1910-146 (formerly 3630620), Separation by Reason of Misconduct - 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