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

 
ex-SR, USN
Docket No. ND03-01366

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20030814.  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 discharge review before a traveling panel closest to New York City, NY or Jersey City, NJ.  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 hearing are held in the Washington, DC Area.  The Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) also advised that the Board first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing.

Decision

A documentary discharge 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, 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.  “Attention:  Naval Discharge Review Boards

I, A_ L_, SSN: XXX-XX-XXXX, transcribe this ”Request for Upgrade of Record”, to your office for review.  This request is in reference to the classification of my discharge paper (DD-241).

I enlisted in the United States Navy, May 30, 2001 and served until November 8, 2002.  This was an early released, due to the results of a military urine test.  At which, was found positive.  And I admit, it was foolish of me, to have been involved in a situation of that caliber of conduct in the first place; there was no excuse, just weakness.  However, I appealed to the Board for leniency, while reviewing my record.

I feel a shame for my actions and correcting my errors in life will be the only way to get back on track.”

Documentation

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

Applicant’s DD Form 214
Potential Character Witness Questionnaire (2 pages)
Character Reference Letter from Command Career Counselor, USS BRISCOE (DD 977)
Potential Character Witness Questionnaire (16, 2 pages each)
Letters from Applicant (2) 

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	010511 - 010529	COG
	Active:   USN			None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  010530		Date of Discharge:  021108

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    01  05  09
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  32			Years Contracted:  4 

Education Level:  10			AFQT:  41

Highest Rate:  SN

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  NMA*	Behavior:  NMA		OTA:  NMA

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  NDSM

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None

*No Marks Available for review

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:

020214:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 112a: Wrongful use of controlled substance.
	Award:  Forfeiture of $1071.00 pay per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to E-2.  No indication of appeal in the record.

020607:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 112a: Wrongful use of controlled substance.
	Award:  Forfeiture of $577.00 pay per month for 2 months, reduction to E-1.  No indication of appeal in the record.

020609:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to pattern of misconduct and misconduct due to drug abuse.

020609:	Applicant advised of rights and having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to appear before an Administrative Discharge Board.

020813:	An Administrative Discharge Board, based upon a preponderance of the evidence and by unanimous vote, found that the Applicant had committed misconduct due to drug abuse and misconduct due to pattern of misconduct, that the misconduct warranted separation, and recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions.

020919:	Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to pattern of misconduct and misconduct due to drug abuse (use). 

021106:	COMCARGRU TWO authorized 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 20021108 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.  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 Applicant’s service record is marred by award of nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for illegal drug use on two separate occasions, thus substantiating the misconduct.  Relief denied.   

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 Board determined that the documentation submitted by the Applicant does not mitigate his misconduct while on active duty. 

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.  The Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), re-issued October 2002, effective 22 Aug 2002 until Present, 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