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

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

 - ex-DKSN, USN
Docket No. ND05-01200

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20050714.  The Applicant requested that his characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable and the Narrative Reason for Separation be changed to “RE Code”.  The Applicant requested a documentary record discharge review and did not designate a representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20060209.  After a thorough review of all available 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 characterization of the discharge and reason for discharge shall not change.  The discharge shall remain General (Under Honorable Conditions) by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

“I AM REQUESTING THAT MY RE CODE AND DISCHARGE TYPE BE UPGRADED SO THAT I MAY REENLIST.  I WAS DISCHARGED AUGUST 24TH 2001 FOR THE ILLEGAL USE OF MARIJUANA.  FOR THIS I WAS GIVEN A GENERAL UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS DISCHARGE WITH AN RE-4 RE-ENLISTMENT CODE, PREVENTING ME FROM REENLISTING.  MY DECISION TO USE MARIJUANA, WAS WITHOUT A DOUBT, THE WORST DESCISION I HAVE EVER MADE.  WITH A POST TEEN REBELIOUS ANGST, I SINGLE HANDEDLY TOOK AWAY MY DREAM AND GOAL OF A NAVAL CAREER.  EACH YEAR SINCE MY DISCHARGE HAS BEEN A COMPOUNDED LESSON IN HOW I ALLOWED DRUG USE TO STRIP MY FUTURE AWAY.  I FIND MYSELF WANTING TO PLAN FOR THAT FUTURE AND REACH MY DREAMS.  I HAVE WANTED TO SERVE MY COUNTRY AND DEFEND ITS PEOPLES, IDEALS AND WAY OF LIFE SINCE I FIRST UNDERSTOOD AS A BOY THAT AMERICA IS THE GREATEST COUNTRY ON EARTH.  WHEN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEIGIANCE WAS NO LONGER REQUIRED IN SCHOOL, I WAS DISHEARTENED.  ALTHOUGH NOT NEARLY AS HEART BROKEN AS WHEN I REALIZED THAT THROUGH ACTIONS BORN OF CHILDISH IMMATURITY, I HAD TAKEN AWAY MY HOPES AND DREAMS FOR A FUTURE AS WELL AS MY NAVAL CAREER.  I WAS ONCE A SAILOR IN THE GREATEST NAVY IN THE WORLD.  I WAS PART OF A TEAM GREATER THAN MYSELF.  I HAVE REGRETED MY MISTAKE SINCE I MADE IT.  NOW THAT I AM OLDER, MORE MATURE, AND MORE AWARE OF THE WORLD AROUND ME, I AM WILLING TO FIGHT TO PROVE THAT YOU WOULD NOT BE GIVING ME A WAISTED OPPORTUNITY.  WHILE IN BOOTCAMP, AT NATTC PENSACOLA, AND AT MY FIRST PERMANENT DUTY STATION, I WAS REFERRED TO BY MY SHIPMATES AS “JOE NAVY”.  MY PASSION FOR THE NAVY IS RIVALED BY NONE.  I BELIEVE THAT A LACK OF COMMITMENT TO MY OWN STANDARDS, AS WELL AS MILITARY STANDARDS ARE WHAT ALLOWED ME TO FALL IN WITH THE WRONG CROWD, INSTEAD OF REPORTING THEM TO THE PROPER AUTHORITIES.  I HAVE NEVER FELT A GREATER LOSS THAN WHEN I LOST MY CAREER AS A UNITED STATES SAILOR.  IF GIVEN THE CHANCE TO SERVE AGAIN, I KNOW WITHOUT A DOUBT THAT I WOULD NOT MAKE THE SAME MISTAKE, OR ANY OTHER THAT MIGHT COST ME MY NAVAL CAREER.  TO ME, THE NAVY IS MORE THAN A CAREER, IT IS A WAY OF LIFE.  SINCE MY DISCHARGE I HAVE COME TO UNDERSTAND A FEW THINGS.  ONE OF THESE THINGS IS THAT YOU CAN TAKE A SAILOR OUT OF THE NAVY, BUT YOU CANNOT TAKE THE NAVY OUT OF A SAILOR.  I AM PROUD TO HAVE SERVED.  WHAT I REGRET, IS LETTING DOWN MYSELF, MY FAMILY, AND THE NATION I SO PROUDLY SERVED BY THE NATURE OF MY DISCHARGE.  THIS, AND MY DESIRE TO BE A PROPER EXAMPLE AND FATHER FOR MY DAUGHTER ARE WHY I AM REQUESTING THIS UPGRADE IN STATUS, AND WITH IT, THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE THE PERSON AND SAILOR I STARTED OUT TO BECOME.”

Documentation

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

Applicant’s DD Form 214
Character witness statement from DK1 A_ M. M_, dated July 24, 2001 (2 pages)
Character witness statement from DK1 M_ G. W_, dated August 11, 2002 (2 pages)
Character witness statement from DK2 D_ E. C_, dated August 10, 2001 (2 pages)
Character witness statement from BM2 T_ D. G_, dated August 11, 2001 (2 pages) 
Character witness statement from DK2 M_ R. C_, dated August 10, 2001 (2 pages) 
Character witness statement from BM3 (SW) P_, dated August 13, 2001 (2 pages)
Character witness statement from YNC (SW/AW) F_ P. S_, dated August 12, 2001 (2 pages)

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive:  USNR (DEP)	19981214 - 19990620	COG
	Active:    None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  19990621		Date of Discharge:  20010824

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    02 02 04
	Inactive:  None

Time Lost During This Period (days):  

	Unauthorized absence:  None
	Confinement:		  None

Age at Entry:  18

Years Contracted:  4 (12 month extension)

Education Level:  12				AFQT:  42

Highest Rate:  DK3

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  3.3 (3)		Behavior:  4.0 (3)		OTA:  3.55 (3)

Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, (as listed on the DD Form 214):  Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal, Sea Service Deployment Ribbon, Navy “E” Ribbon

Character, Narrative Reason, and Authority of Discharge (at time of issuance):
GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/MISCONDUCT, authority: MILPERSMAN, Article 1910-146, formerly 3630620

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events: 
981214:	Applicant admitted to prior service marijuana use.

010705:	NAVDRUGLAB, San Diego, CA, reported Applicant’s urine sample, received 010629, tested positive for THC.

010709:	Applicant’s voluntary statement.  The Applicant admitted to smoking marijuana on 010623 and 010624 and prior knowledge of the Navy’s policy on illegal drug use.

010711:	NJP for a violation of the UCMJ, Article 112a (wrongful use of marijuana).
	Award:  Forfeiture of $654 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to E-3.  Restriction and extra duty for 5 days suspended for 6 months.  No indication of appeal in the record.

010711:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with the least favorable characterization of service as under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct-drug abuse.

010813:	Applicant advised of rights and having consulted with counsel, elected to appear before an Administrative Discharge Board.

010814:	An Administrative Discharge Board, based upon a preponderance of the evidence and by unanimous vote, found that the Applicant had committed misconduct due to drug abuse, that such misconduct warranted separation, and recommended discharge with a general (under honorable conditions).

010815:	Commanding Officer, USS JOHN C. STENNIS (CVN 74) directed discharge with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct - drug abuse.

010916:	Commanding Officer, USS JOHN C. STENNIS (CVN 74) notified CNPC of Applicant’s administrative separation by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.  Commanding Officer’s comments:  “DKSN B_(Applicant) demonstrated that he cannot conform his behavior to that expected of members of the United States Navy.  He was processed for administrative separation and elected an administrative board.  The board recommended separation from the naval service with a General (Under Honorable Conditions).”

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 20010824 by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse (A and B) with a service characterization of general (under honorable conditions).  After a thorough review of all available records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper and equitable (C and D).  

When the service of a member of the U.S. Navy has been honest and faithful, it is appropriate to characterize that service as honorable.  A General (under honorable conditions) discharge is warranted when significant negative aspects of a member's conduct outweigh the positive aspects of the member's military record.  Despite a servicemember’s prior record of service, certain serious offenses warrant separation from the naval service in order to maintain proper order and discipline.  The Applicant’s service record documented nonjudicial punishment for a violation of the UCMJ, Article 112a (wrongful use of a controlled substance, marijuana).  Applicable regulations dictate that processing for separation is mandatory for sailors who abuse illegal drugs, the misconduct for which that Applicant was discharged.  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.  Separation under these conditions generally results in an under other than honorable conditions characterization of service.  The Board found no inequity or impropriety in the Applicant’s discharge. Relief denied.

The Applicant requested that his narrative reason for separation be changed to “RECODE”.  For the edification of the Applicant, the Naval Military Personnel Manual does not permit “RECODE” as an authorized narrative reason for separation.  The Applicant was discharged as a result of his violation of UCMJ, Article 112a (drug abuse).  The Naval Military Personnel Manual directs “Misconduct” as the appropriate narrative reason for use, possession, distribution, or manufacture of a controlled substance.  No other narrative reason for separation could more clearly describe why the Applicant was discharged.  To change the narrative reason for separation would be inappropriate.  Relief denied.

Since the NDRB has no jurisdiction over reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Navy, Marine Corps, or any other of the Armed Forces, NDRB is not authorized to change a reenlistment code.  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.  This issue does not merit relief.

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), Change 33, effective 16 Jul 2001 until 21 Aug 2002, Article 1910-146 (formerly 3630620), Separation by Reason of Misconduct - Drug Abuse.

B.  The Manual for Courts-Martial authorizes the award of a punitive discharge if adjudged as part of the sentence upon conviction by a special or general court-martial for violation of the UCMJ, Article 112a.

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