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

 ex-RMSR, USN
Docket No. ND04-00554

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20040218.  The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions.  The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review.  The Applicant did not list any representative on the DD Form 293.
In the acknowledgement letter, the Applicant was informed that he was approaching the 15 year point for review by this Board and was encouraged to attend a personal appearance hearing in the Washington, D.C. area.  Applicant did not respond.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20040922.  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.  “Under the explanation, at the time of my discharge, I was told there would be a good chance to upgrade the discharge to “General” providing that I began to set an example and became a model citizen.  I strongly believe that my background reflects my personal commitment to become a model citizen.  Especially to the children in our community.  I have been very active in the community and youth organizations.

I would also like to have my discharge reviewed so I can continue to become and play an important role in my community through programs like the Constable Citizen Police Academy and numerous other youth association around the city.  My wife and I also play in setting up and participating in the Annual 4th of July parade commerating all the soldiers you have served in the service, especially those who served in Vietnam.

I like to think that I have strided to set the standard for our young residents, with the hope that they will be better informed and more aware of the decisions they make.

If there was any way that I could turn back time or even be given the chance or opportunity to make things right.  I would do it in an instant. I only wish that I was the man I am today, almost 15 years ago.  I would never have made such a decision, nor would I have even came out until after serving my complete 20 years.  

If there is any other programs I could get involved with, please do not hesitate to let me know.  As I had spoken before, I am very pro-military, and I would like to be given the opportunity to continue contributing to the community, by allowing me to enter the citizen’s police academy.  I would like to thank you for your time.”

Documentation

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

Copy of ltr from RM1 K_ A. K_ dtd 890217
Eight pages from Applicant’s service record
Ltr frm Applicant dtd 040331
Certificate of Attendance dtd 890923
Cerftiate of Honor dtd 891215
Certificate of Membership, not dtd
Copy of ltr from George W. Bush dtd 030731
Texas Commission of Law Enforcement Standards [6 pages]

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	860630 - 870616	COG
	Active:   None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  870617		Date of Discharge:  890221

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    01  08  05
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  18			Years Contracted:  4 

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  48

Highest Rate:  RMSR

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  NMF*		Behavior:  3.40 (1)		OTA:  NMF

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  None

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None

*NMF – no marks found in service record

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:

881216:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 112a:  use of amphetamine/methamphetamine.
	Award:  Forfeiture of $325 per month for 2 month(s), restriction and extra duty for 45 days.  No indication of appeal in the record.

890112:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 112a:  use of amphetamine/methamphetamine.
	Award:  Forfeiture of $340 per month for 2 month(s), restriction and extra duty for 45 days.  No indication of appeal in the record.

890203:	Medical evaluation:  [Applicant] assessed psychologically dependant, in remission.  Recommendation:  Level III rehab.

890212:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse and misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.

[undated]:	Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult 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 and the right to submit a statement.

890214:	Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse (use) and due to commission of a serious offense.

890214:	CNMPC 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 19890221 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 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.

Normally, to permit relief, a procedural impropriety or inequity must have occurred during the discharge process for the period of enlistment in question.  The Board discovered no impropriety 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, 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.  Additionally, the Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational opportunities.  Relief denied.

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