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

   ex-MSSR, USN
Docket No. ND05-00258

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20041115.  The Applicant requested the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable.  The Applicant requested a documentary record review.  The Applicant did not list a representative on her DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20050201.  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 am asking the Board to conduct a review of my records base on my military Personnel file and upgrade my Discharge to Honorable.  When I went on active duty in 9/2002 I was very young and immature, this was my first time away from home.  After about 8 months of active duty I want to go home. I miss my mother & Family.  While on Leave I return home, while at home I got pregnant After the shock that I found out I was pregnant I went AWOL for a 22 days.  But I have since mature and understand that I should have handle things differently. I am requesting that the Board please upgrade my discharge.”

Documentation

The Applicant did not submit any additional documentation for the Board to consider during the deliberation of her case.

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	020325 - 020924	COG
	Active:   			None			HON

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  020925		Date of Discharge:  031021

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    01  00  05 (Accounts for lost time.)
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  18			Years Contracted:  4 

Education Level:  10			AFQT:  64

Highest Rate:  MSSR

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  1.00 (1)		Behavior:  1.00 (1)		OTA:  1.00

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  NDSM

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  03JUN30-03Jul22 (22)

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:

030630:	Applicant to UA.

030722:	Applicant surrendered from UA.

030801:	NAVDRUGLAB, JACKSONVILLE, FL reported Applicant’s urine sample, received 030730, tested positive for THC.

030814:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: UA 030630-030722 (22days/S); violation of UCMJ, Article 112a: Wrongful use of a controlled substance (marijuana).
Award:  Forfeiture of $600.00 pay per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to E-1.  No indication of appeal in the record.

030814:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.

030814:	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.

031006:	Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse (use).  Commanding Officer’s comments (verbatim): MSSR W___ tested positive for marijuana.  She admitted to purchasing and using marijuana while she was in an unauthorized absence status.  Based upon her misconduct, I believe that MSSR W____ has no potential for further naval service and recommended that she be separated with an Other Than Honorable discharge.    
 
031017:	Commander, Cruiser-Destroyer Group EIGHT 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 20031021 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:  Normally, to permit relief, an error or injustice must have existed during the period of enlistment in question.  No such error or injustice occurred during the Applicant’s enlistment.  While she may feel her youth and immaturity were contributing factors to her misconduct, they do not mitigate the Applicant’s disobedience of the orders and directives regulating good order and discipline in the naval service.  Sailors guilty of illegal drug use normally receive a discharge characterization of under other than honorable conditions.  The Applicant’s service record is marred by the awarding of nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for illegal drug use and unauthorized absence, substantiating her misconduct.  It must be noted most Sailors serve honorably; thereby, earning their honorable discharges.  In fairness to those Sailors, commanders and separation authorities are tasked to ensure the undeserving receive no higher a service characterization than is due.  An upgrade to honorable conditions would be inappropriate.  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.  The NDRB is authorized to consider outstanding 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.  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, documentation of community service, and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities, and credible evidence of a substance-free lifestyle are examples of verifiable documents that should be provided to receive consideration for relief, based on post-service conduct.   The Applicant did not provide any documentation for the Board to consider during the deliberation of her case.  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 additional documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments 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 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part II, AUTHORITY/POLICY FOR DEPARTMENTAL DISCHARGE REVIEW.

C.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part V, Para 502, Propriety.

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

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