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

ex-AN, USN
Docket No. ND03-01301

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20030730.  The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions.  The Applicant requests a personal appearance hearing before the board in the Washington National Capital Region.  The Applicant listed Disabled American Veterans as the representative on the DD Form 293.  In the acknowledgement letter, the Applicant was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing.

Decision

A documentary review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20040526.  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.  “My discharge was inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident in 18 months of service with no other adverse action.  I was offered no rehabilitation.  I have a CDL License which requires random drug testing which I pass.  My military record shows my service medals and citations.  I wish to have and upgrade for better employment.  Thank you for your consideration”

Additional issues submitted by Applicant’s representative (Disabled American Veterans):

2.  “Dear Chairperson:

After a review of the Former Service Members (FSM) DD Form 293 Application for the Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the Armed Forces of the United States and all of evidence assembled for review, we continue to note the contention of the appellant in his request for a discharge upgrade of his current Other Than Honorable (OTH) discharge to that of General Under Honorable Conditions.

The FSM served on active service from September 12, 1990 to March 11, 1992 at which time he was discharged due to Misconduct - Drug Abuse.

The FSM contends the current discharge is improper because it was based on one isolated incident during eighteen months of active service, with no other adverse actions.  He further states that his military records should be reviewed to show that he had good honorable service.  His current employment as a truck driver requires the recurring, random drug screenings which he has passed without incident.

As the representative, we ask that consideration be given to equitable relief, as this is a matter that involves a determination whether a discharge should be changed under the equity standards, to include any issue upon which the Applicant submits to the Board’s discretionary authority, under SECNAVIST 5420.174C.

Under the premises of equitable relief, we believe the Board can change the current discharge to reflect a General Under Honorable Conditions discharge.

We ask for the Board’s careful and sympathetic consideration of all the evidence of record used in rendering a fair and impartial decision.  These issues do not supersede any issues previously submitted by the Applicant.

Respectfully,”

Documentation

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

Applicant’s DD Form 214
Character reference, Pastor of East Brook Presbyterian Church, dated February 18, 2003

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	900709 - 900911	COG
	Active:   USN			None			HON

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  900912		Date of Discharge:  920311

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    01  06  00
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  18			Years Contracted:  4  

Education Level:  11			AFQT:  66

Highest Rate:  AN

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  3.00 (1)	Behavior:  2.00 (1)		OTA:  3.80

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  NUC, NDSM, SASM w/ Bronze star, KLM

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:

920117:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 112A: Wrongful use of controlled substance on 920107, to wit: THC.
	Award:  Reduction to AA.  No indication of appeal in the record.

920116:	Medical evaluation for drug abuse found the Applicant to be a drug abuser, not drug dependent.  

920121:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse as evidenced by all incidents of drug abuse in your current enlistment.

920121:	Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights.

920226:	Commanding Officer recommended discharge under honorable conditions (general) by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse (use).
 
920302:	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 19920311 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).

Issues 1-2.  The Applicant states his discharge was based on one isolated incident in “18 months.”  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.  The summary of service clearly documents that misconduct due to drug abuse was the reason the Applicant was discharged.  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 considers his discharge proper and equitable.  Relief denied.

There is credible evidence in the record that the Applicant used illegal drugs.  Mandatory processing for separation is required for sailors who abuse illegal drugs.  Separation under these conditions generally results in characterization of service under other than honorable conditions.  The Board found no indication in the record that the Applicant was inequitably or improperly denied treatment for his drug use.  The Applicant’s allegations, that he was denied assistance and counseling for his personal problems, do not refute the presumption of regularity in this case.  The evidence of record does not demonstrate that the Applicant was not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions.  Relief denied.

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 following is provided for the edification of the Applicant.  Normally, to permit relief, a procedural error or inequity must have occurred during the discharge process for the period of enlistment in question.  The Board discovered no such errors after a review of Applicant’s case.  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 naval service.  The NDRB is authorized, however, to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge to the extent such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review.  Examples of documentation that should be provided to the Board include proof of educational pursuits, verifiable employment records, documentation of community service, certification of non-involvement with civil authorities, and credible evidence of a substance free lifestyle.  As of this time, the Applicant has not provided sufficient documentation for the Board to consider.  Therefore, no relief is appropriate.

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), effective 15 Aug 91 until 04 Mar 93, 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