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

ex-ISSN, USN
Docket No. ND03-01176

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20030626.  The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable.  The Applicant requests a documentary record review.  The Applicant did not designate a representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20040514.  After a thorough review of the available 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 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 46 months of service with no other adverse action.”

2.  “I thank you for taking the time to review my Discharge.  At the time of my discharge I was a young, dumb kid who made a big mistake.  I was dating a dancer and while at the party I allowed myself to be talked into trying cocaine.  I realize it was a stupid thing to do and I take full responsibility for it.  However, it was one mistake.  Prior to enlisting I graduated the Police Academy.  Being a Police Officer is the one thing I have wanted my entire life.  I have spent the last six years regretting that night.  My life is going well.  Five years ago I returned to Florida.  Four years ago I started back to church.  Three years ago, I got married to a wonderful woman.  I currently work for the Town of Davie Utilities Dept.  And I would very much like to finally fulfill my dream of becoming a Police Officer.  My current discharge is a hindrance to that.  I understand the Zero Tolerance policy of the Navy.  Yet at the same time my career has been on hold for six years.  How long must I pay for one mistake in four years of good service.  I pray for your understanding and I beg you to help me.  Thank You, (Signed by the Applicant)”

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):

	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	921119 - 930111	COG
	Active:   None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  930112		Date of Discharge:  970211

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    04  01  00
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  20			Years Contracted:  4 (10 months extension)

Education Level:  GED		AFQT:  80

Highest Rate:  IS3

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  NMA*		Behavior:  NMA		OTA:  NMA

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  GCM, Battle “E” Ribbon

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None

*No Marks Available

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:

970301:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 112A:  Wrongfully use cocaine.
	Award:  Forfeiture of $575 pay per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to E-3.  No indication of appeal in the record.

[Administrative Discharge Package not contained in service record.]

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 19970211 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to drug abuse (A).  In the absence of a discharge package, the Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (B) and, after a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, 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 “46 months.”  The civilian authorities treat some offenses with leniency because they are a first time incident on an otherwise clear record; however, despite a servicemember’s prior record of service, certain serious offenses, even though isolated, warrant separation from the naval service in order to maintain proper order and discipline.  The Applicant’s service record is marred by award of nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for illegal drug use, thus substantiating the misconduct for which he was separated.  Regulations limit the Board’s review to a determination on the propriety and equity of the discharge.  In the Applicant’s case, the Board could discern no impropriety or inequity and therefore consider his discharge proper and equitable.  Relief denied.

Issue 2.  The Applicant contends that his problems in the Navy can be attributed to being "young and dumb".  While he may feel that his immaturity was the underlying cause of his misconduct, the record clearly reflects his willful misconduct and demonstrated he was unfit for further service.  The evidence of record did not show that the Applicant was either not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions.  Relief on this basis is denied.

Additionally, the Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational opportunities as requested in the issue.  Regulations limit the Board’s review to a determination on the propriety and equity of the discharge.  Relief denied.

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 documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments or any other evidence related to his discharge at that time.  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 14, effective 
03 Oct 96 until 11 Dec 97, Article 3630620  SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL 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