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

 ex-SR, USN
Docket No. ND04-00799

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20040422.  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 list any representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20050107.  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.  “I truly and honestly did not abuse marijuana in anyway, shape, or form.  I was completely against and totally unsatisfied with my random drug test results.  The Navy zero-tolerance program did not give me a chance to prove and show that I was not that type of sailor.  Any of my shipmates or civilians that knew me can testify and vouch that I never did that type of thing and at times even counciled new JR. crew members about drug abuse because I had too many friends busted for the same.  Now as a civilian, this discharge severly hinderes my employment opportunity.  I cannot even afford to go to school due to my lack of G.I. Bill education assistance and navy college fund.  The navy was my new family that was instantly taken away.”

Documentation

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

None

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive: None
	Active:   None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  010628		Date of Discharge:  031215

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    02  05  18
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  21			Years Contracted:  4 

Education Level:  10			AFQT:  59/61

Highest Rate:  SN

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  4.00 (2)	Behavior:  3.00 (2)		OTA:  3.50

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  BATTLE”E”, NDSM, SSDR, ESWSBI

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  2

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:

020822:	CO’s NJP [Extracted from Awards Listing]. 

021102:	Unauthorized absence from USS PONCE (LPD-15) as of 0500, 021102.

021104:	Returned to USS PONCE (LPD-15) as of 0500, 021104 (2 days).
 
021112:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Absent from unit.
	Award:  Forfeiture of $649.00 pay per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to E-1.  No indication of appeal in the record.

031215:	Applicant discharged under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse per Separation Authority 1910-146 [Extracted from DD Form 214].

NO DISCHARGE PACKAGE AVAILABLE

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 20031215 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to drug abuse (A).  After a thorough review of the available records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper and equitable (B and C).  The presumption of regularity of governmental affairs was applied by the Board in this case in the absence of a complete discharge package (D).

Issue 1.  The Applicant’s statements do not refute the presumption that he was properly and equitably discharged under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to drug abuse.  The Board’s regulations limit its 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 considered the Applicant’s discharge was proper and equitable.  Relief denied.

The Veterans Administration determines eligibility for post-service benefits, not the NDRB.  There is no requirement or law that grants recharacterization solely on the issue of obtaining veterans’ benefits and this issue does not serve to provide a foundation upon which the Board can grant relief.

Normally, to permit relief, an inequity or impropriety must have existed during the period of enlistment in question.  No such inequity or impropriety is evident during the Applicant’s enlistment.  Additionally, there is no law, or regulation, which provides that an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time, to enhance employment opportunities, or for good conduct in civilian life, subsequent to leaving the service.  Relief not warranted.

The Applicant is reminded that he remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of his discharge.  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 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part V, Para 502, Propriety.

C.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part V, Para 503, Equity.

D.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part II, AUTHORITY/POLICY FOR DEPARTMENTAL DISCHARGE REVIEW.

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 “http://Boards.law.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:

		Secretary of the Navy Council of Review Boards
		Attn:  Naval Discharge Review Board
		720 Kennon Street SE Rm 309
		Washington Navy Yard DC  20374-5023