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

 ex-HTFN, USN
Docket No. ND04-00286

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20031203.  The Applicant requests the reason for the discharge be changed to “End of Service (see attached documents).”  The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review.  The Applicant did not list any representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20040812.  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 narrative reason for discharge shall not change.  The discharge shall remain: HONORABLE /MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630620.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

1.  “Dear Members of the Review Board,

This letter has been written as an attempt to change my Naval record DD-214.  Allow me to begin by confessing my ignorance to the fact that record corrections in the military were possible.  I feel that this is my one opportunity to “make right” so to speak the poor decisions based on youth and immaturity.  The following contains my explanation.

In July of 1995 I had been re-assigned to the U.S.S. Emory S. Land after my previous ship, the U.S.S. Savannah had been decommissioned.  I had served faithfully and willingly onboard the Savannah during my tour on her.  However after be re-assigned to the Land things started to change not only in me but around me as well.  I know for a fact now that this change I speak of was separation anxiety, coupled with a then, un-diagnosed depression.  Everything was new to me again, I didn’t know anyone and it was difficult to make quality friends who weren’t into late night bar hopping and recreational drug use.  I made several attempts to get some solace about my situation from the ship’s chaplain.  However the God he spoke of was of little help in alleviating my feelings of hopelessness and my subtle gravitation toward solitude.  I then went to the Land’s doctor with regard to my “depressed” feelings.  I distinctly remember one visit, my last, when I had brought up the idea that I may be experiencing Seasonal Affective Disorder(SAD),a form of depression and lack of energy which becomes debilitating.( SAD is recognized in the DSM-IV The American Psychiatric Association’s diagnostic manual) as a subtype of a major depressive episode.  Work , relationships, and the individual suffer tremendously.  The doctor then asked why I felt I had this “SAD”.  I described to him exactly and honestly how I felt inside; the lack of energy, bouts of crying and the frustration associated with not being able to come to grips with what was wrong with me.  I then went on to explain that my eating and smoking habits had changed.  I was eating less and smoking more cigarettes, and when I did eat, the food contained many carbohydrates, which I had read at the time, is a symptom of not only depression but this seasonal affective disorder as well.  He then looked up with, oddly enough, a Saltine cracker in his hand, took a bite and said, “I’m eating carbohydrates and I’m not depressed.” I placed my trust in this doctor not only to treat me, but to take me seriously.  He did neither.

During my enlistment I had come into contact with all sorts of people; people who were not morally conscious.  They ran rampant on the two ships I served on.  There were drug dealers, drug users, alcoholics who drank off duty, alcoholics who drank on duty, there were those who would frequent prostitutes and those who would brutally beat those same prostitutes when they were finished with them.  I only had to be around and witness and listen to these people to know I didn’t want to be like them nor apart of what they were doing.  I knew from talking to these same people that getting caught on a urinalysis would be a swift way to get out of the Navy, but that’s not what I wanted.  I wanted help, help from a psychologist or counselor.  So I decided to visit the command drug and alcohol counselor and tell them I had a drug problem so I could get some help, even though I had not engaged in drug usage.  The counselor I initially spoke to, who was an admitted recovering alcoholic, told me to go to Narcotics Anonymous or Alcoholics Anonymous meetings as often as I could.  So I went.  And I went.  Nothing changed in me though.  At least not completely.  Some of my suffering had been alleviated by hearing of stories of lives far worse than any I could concoct on my own.  Also just sitting in the presence of others who were miserable made me feel a little better.  I continued to go to these meetings and go visit (l a week for three weeks) with the counselor until he stopped acknowledging me.  He literally would not look at me nor would he recognize my presence when I entered his office.  You can certainly imagine just how hopeless I felt at that point.

Then it happened, six months later.  I received a call from the legal department onboard the Land requesting I be present to sign my discharge paperwork in order to get things moving.  I didn’t want that!!, but by then there was simply nothing left in me that said “FIGHT!” Looking back, it felt like someone else signed those forms, walking those passageways and living that life, as if it were all a bad dream..

I was 21 then and am 30 years old now with a wife and two great step-children.  My memory of my time in the Navy is the albatross that hangs around my neck.  There has not been a day in the last 8 years I haven’t felt shameful for my actions then in 1995.  There hasn’t been a day that I haven’t felt remorse.  Then 8 years later I find I have a chance to possibly correct my mistake, at least on paper, in order to better reflect the human being that I have become.  That chance is in your hands, right now.  I have lived an exemplary life since my discharge, one in which I, my mother and my wife are proud of.  I am respectfully requesting that you first waive the 3 year time limit for hearing my case, and secondly, objectively review all the material I have sent to you concerning my case.  It is my hope that you will see that what I have presented to you is an honest assessment of my past, and a testament to my present and future.  What I am requesting is that you, the members, review and change the “Narrative Reason for Discharge” from “Misconduct” to “End of Service” or something similar.  My logic for that type of narrative reason for discharge was that it was technically the end of my service.  Also the Separation Code could be re-evaluated as well.  The re-enlistment code could be changed from RE-4 to perhaps RE-3G, which is “Condition (not physical) interfering with performance of duty”, or something similar.  I want to conclude this letter by sincerely thanking those of you who have read this and will decide on the fate of this case for your time and effort.

Respectfully,

G_ P_ S_ (Applicant).”

Documentation

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

Copy of DD Form 214 (Service 2)
Creativity Award, 2002, Kent Stat University
Certificate of Recognition, Quality Service Team Award from Kent State
Chief of Police, Kent State University Report January 15, 2002
Reference of character from H_ M_ S_, Assistant Director of Financial Aid
Performance Evaluation from Kent State University, (4 pages)

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	930313 - 931206	COG
	Active:   USN			None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  931207		Date of Discharge:  951218

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    02  00  12
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  20			Years Contracted:  4 

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  84

Highest Rate:  HTFN

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  3.93 (3)	Behavior:  3.73 (3)		OTA:  3.80

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  NDSM, AFEM, USCGSOR, USCGUC, B“E”R, JMUA, HSM

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None

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

HONORABLE/MISCONDUCT, authority:  NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630620.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

950924:	Drug and Alcohol Abuse Report: On 950914, Applicant made a self - referral/disclosure of LSD abuse and trafficking about 1-3 times per week.  The abuse and trafficking was done ashore-off duty.  Physician found applicant not dependent and not eligible for rehabilitation.  Recommendation of level 1 disposition.  

951115:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse as evidenced by self–referral for drug abuse with the least favorable characterization of service as general (under honorable conditions).

951115:	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.

960311:	Commanding Officer, advised BUPERS that the Applicant was discharged with a honorable discharge on 951218 by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse, as evidenced by self-referral for drug abuse.

960411:	BUPERS: advised command that applicant did not qualify for discharge under authority delegated MPM 3610220.  Applicant discharge did not meet criteria for separation under voluntary self-referral program as outlined in OPNAVINST 5350.4B.  Voluntary self-referral for counseling, treatment or rehab is a one time procedure that enables those who: a. feel they may be drug dependant, and b. want help for their drug dependency.  to obtain help without risk of disciplinary action.  SNM was neither drug dependent nor wanted help for his drug problem.  Therefore, Applicant should have been processed for misconduct due to drug abuse as evidenced by mbr’s admission of drug abuse.  The above is intended to assist you in future processing.  No further action required in this case.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 19951218 with a honorable discharge 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.  The Applicant contends that he never used drugs and admitted usage for the purpose of obtaining “help from a psychologist or counselor” for his personal problems.  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.  The NDRB recognizes that serving in the U.S. Navy is challenging.  Our country is fortunate to have men and women willing to ensure the hardships and sacrifices required in order to serve their country.  Your self-admission to drug use is considered as “wrongful use of a controlled substance” punishable under the UCMJ, Article 112a, any other Narrative Reason would be inappropriate.  Relief denied.

The Applicant contends that his problems in the Navy can be attributed to his "Seasonal Affective Disorder."  While he may feel that psychological problems were 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 denied.

Normally, to permit relief, a procedural error or inequity must have occurred during the discharge process for the period of enlistment in question.  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, credible evidence of a substance free lifestyle and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities.  As of this time, the Applicant has not provided sufficient documentation for the Board to consider.  Relief denied.

Concerning a change in reenlistment code, the NDRB has no authority to change reenlistment codes or make recommendations to permit reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Naval Service or any other branch of the Armed Forces.  An unfavorable “RE” code is, in itself, not a bar to reenlistment.  A request for a waiver can be submitted during the processing of a formal application for reenlistment through a recruiter.  Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) can make changes to reenlistment codes.

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 9/94, effective 
22 Jul 94 until 02 Oct 96, 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