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

 ex-AM3, USN
Docket No. ND04-01055

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20040614.  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 20041122.  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.  “Creates difficulty in obtaining employment & I wish to further my education.
My discharge was inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident in 33 months of active service.”

Documentation

The Applicant did not submit any additional documentation for the Board’s consideration of his case.

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	000428 - 000525	COG
	Active:   None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  000526		Date of Discharge:  030228

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    02  09  03
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  18			Years Contracted:  4 (12 months extension)

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  79

Highest Rate:  AM3

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  3.75 (4)	Behavior:  2.75 (4)		OTA:  3.26

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  NDSM, SSDR

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None

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:

030117:	NAVDRUGLAB, San Diego, CA, reported Applicant’s urine sample, received 030113, tested positive for THC.

030127:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse  as evidenced by positive urinalysis as determined by the Navy Drug Lab, San Diego, CA.

030127:	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.

030210:	Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse (use).  Commanding Officer’s comments (verbatim): Aviation Machinist’s Mate Third Class T_ (Applicant) tested positive for marijuana in a command sweep on 7 January 2003.  He admitted that he smoked marijuana on New Year’s Eve and that it was the first time that he had ever done it.  MILPERSMAN 1910-146 mandates processing for separation from the Naval Service.  Recommend that he be discharged under Other Than Honorable characterization for misconduct due to wrongful use of a controlled substance.

030212:	Commanding Officer, Naval Air Station Whidbey Island 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 20030228 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.  The Applicant states his discharge was based on one isolated incident in “33 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 good 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.  Regulations limit the Board’s review to a determination on the propriety and equity of the discharge.  In the Applicant’s case, the Board discovered no impropriety or inequity and therefore consider his discharge proper and equitable.    Additionally, the Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational opportunities.  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 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 any documentation for the Board to consider.  Relief denied.

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