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

ex-SKSR, USN
Docket No. ND03-01140

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20030619.  The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable.  The Applicant requests a personal appearance discharge review before a traveling panel closest to Porterville, CA 932578.  The Applicant did not list any representative on the DD Form 293.  In the acknowledgement letter, the Applicant was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) does not travel; all hearings are held in the Washington, D.C. area.  Subsequent to the application, the Applicant converted to a documentary discharge review.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20040624.  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 – Drug abuse (Use), authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630620.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

1.  “I have become a productive member of society and now work as an Alcohol and Drug Specialist/Social Worker II for the County of Tulare.  I am also a licenced Minister for the state of California, and Assistant Pastor for my local church.  Attached are letters of reference and special certificates, Aswauth.

My record prior to the incident shows that I was a quality sailor that could have been rehabilitated, no rehabilitation was offered Aswauth.

I tried to seek counseling for my drug-abuse from the Chaplin, he said that because I had already taken my Urinalysis that I was not eligible for counseling, Aswauth.

My discharge was based solely on drug-related conduct, Aswauth.

Aside from the drugs, my service record was above average, Aswauth.

I received awards and decoration, Aswauth.

My record of promotions showed I was above average service member, Aswauth.”

Documentation

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

Letter from Applicant, dated June 7, 2003
Character reference from First Vice Chair, Domestic Workers Home Care Center, dated June 3, 2003
Character reference from Prevention Services Coordinator II, Tulare County, dated May 21, 2003
Character reference from Pastor, Faith Tabernacle, dated May 28, 2003
Character reference from Reverend, Faith Tabernacle, undated
Character reference from Substance Abuse Treatment Counsel, dated May 27, 2003
Thank you letter from Social Worker, County of Tulare, Probation Department, dated April 3, 2003
Ministerial license, dated January 1, 2003
Certificate of graduation, dated October 23, 2000
Certificate of accomplishment, dated September 27, 2001
Certificate from California Association for Alcohol/Drug Educators, dated July 5, 2002
Certificate of completion, dated August 23, 2002
SF Form 180
Applicant’s DD Form 214 (3)
Seventy-two pages from Applicant’s service and medical record

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive: None
	Active:   None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  881102		Date of Discharge:  900503

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    01  06  02
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  23			Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  11 GED		AFQT:  47

Highest Rate:  SKSA

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  3.40 (2)	Behavior:  3.40 (2)		OTA:  3.60

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  None

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:

881107:	Applicant briefed on Navy's policy of drug and alcohol abuse.

900316:	Medical evaluation for drug abuse found the Applicant to be a drug abuser, not drug dependent.  

900404:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 112A: Wrongful use of marijuana on 900217.
	Award: Forfeiture of $362 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to SKSR.  No indication of appeal in the record.

900409:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.

900409:	Applicant advised of 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.

900424:	Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.

900427:	CNMPC directed the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 19900503 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to drug abuse (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.  There is credible evidence in the record that the Applicant used illegal drugs.  Drug abuse warranted processing for separation.  Separation under these conditions generally results in characterization of service under other than honorable conditions.  The discharge was proper and equitable.  Relief denied.

The Applicant’s discharge characterization accurately reflects his service to his country.  Normally, to permit relief, an error or inequity must have existed during the period of enlistment in question.  No such error or inequity 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.  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, employment record, documentation of community service, certification of non-involvement with civil authorities and credible evidence of a substance free lifestyle, are examples of verifiable documentation that may be provided to receive consideration for relief, based on post-service conduct.  The Applicant’s evidence of post-service conduct was found not to mitigate the discharge sufficient to warrant an upgrade.  Relief not warranted.

The Applicant is reminded that he remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of his 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 15560A), Change 6, effective 11 Jan 89 until 13 Jun 90, 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