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

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

ex-ADAA, USN
Docket No. ND06-00518

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20060228.  The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable or general (under honorable conditions).  The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review.  The Applicant did not designate a representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20070110.  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 by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.

The NDRB did note administrative error(s) on the original DD Form 214.  Block 24, Character of Service, should read:  “UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS.”  The Commander, Navy Personnel Command, Millington, TN, will be notified, recommending the DD Form 214 be corrected or reissued, as appropriate.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application and/or attached document/letter:

“To whom it may concern:

An upgraded or change is requested and justified because I would love to return to active duty.  Having a re-entry code 4 no branch would allow me.  With all my heart, mind, body, and soul I really want to return to the Navy.  I want you to know that I take full responsibility for my actions.

When I first joined I was going for the wrong reason.  At the age of seventeen I just knew that I had all the answers to life.  I now understand what it means to serve my country.  I would like the chance to correct my wrongs and serve the United States with my prior experience as an Aviation Machinist Mate.

At the time I didn’t have the best decision making skills.  Now being mature I know what it means to serve with honor, courage, commitment, and dedication.  Besides, I really have a passion for what I did in the military.  Not a single day goes by that I see an airplane or helicopter I say, “I know the characteristics and physics of that bird.” If I had a second chance I would have another opportunity to accelerate my life.

Thank you,

W_ C.  R_ (Applicant)”

Applicant’s Remarks:  (Taken from the DD Form 293.)

“I do take full responsibility for my action.
I know now what I did was not a mistake but a bad choice.
I’ve grown, I’m married and want a family.
In the Navy I achieved alot.  Graduated high school, received Plain Captain while in the shop “power plants”, and other certificates:  (See attachments)”

Documentation

In addition to the service and medical records, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:

Applicant’s DD Form 214 (Service - 2)
Applicant’s Evaluation Record and Counseling Report for period December 19, 2002 to February 12, 2003 (2 pages)
Applicant’s high school diploma
Applicant’s Certificate of Completion from Chief of Naval Education and Training, dtd December 20, 2001
Applicant’s Certificate of Training from Naval Air Technical Data and Engineering Service Command, dtd October 29, 2002
Applicant’s SE License Certification, dtd June 19, 2002 (2 pages)
Applicant’s SE License Certification, dtd July 19, 2002 (2 pages)
Applicant’s American Red Cross card for Adult CPR, dtd January 15, 2002 (front and back
Applicant’s respirator fit test card, dtd July 11, 2002
Applicant’s Occupational Health Examination Certificate, dtd February 5, 2002
Applicant’s Noise Qualification Form, undated
Applicant’s SE License Certification, dtd September 4, 2002 (2 pages)
Applicant’s SE License Certification, undated (2 pages)
Character Reference ltr from J_ P. L_, Tire and Lube Express Manager, Wal-Mart, dtd April 20, 2006
Applicant’s performance appraisal, TLE Service Technician, dtd March 2, 2006 (2 pages)

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive:  USNR (DEP)	20010224 - 20010806	COG
	Active:    None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  20010807		Date of Discharge:  20030212

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    01  06  06
	Inactive:  None

Time Lost During This Period (days):

	Unauthorized absence:  None
	Confinement:		  None

Age at Entry:  17 (Parental Consent)

Years Contracted:  4 (18-month extension)

Education Level:  12				AFQT:  41

Highest Rate:  ADAN

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  2.0 (2)		Behavior:  1.5 (2)		OTA:  2.00

Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, (as listed on the DD Form 214):  National Defense Service Medal

Character, Narrative Reason, and Authority of Discharge (at time of issuance):

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/MISCONDUCT, authority: MILPERSMAN, Article 1910-146, formerly 3630620.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events: 

021028:	Medical evaluation at Substance Abuse Rehabilitation Department, Naval Medical Center San Diego, R. W_ C_ MFT and EOC W_ W_, USN, Intern, Substance Abuse Counselor.
	This 18 year old, single male E-3 (Applicant), Navy, with 1 year active service was referred for a substance abuse evaluation due to off base DUI 020907.  BAC .07.  DAPA reports that member had 4 32oz beers in 45 minutes (stopped by CHP 2½ - 3 hours later).
	Patient does not feel that his drinking is a problem.  “When I drink, I don’t drink that much.”
AXIS I: Alcohol abuse.  Nicotine dependence.
	AXIS II: No diagnosis.
	AXIS III: None reported.
	AXIS IV: Legal and court and pending NJP.
	AXIS V: 70 (current),
	Recommendations:
	1. Substance abuse treatment is indicated.  Recommend Phase 1 Intensive Outpatient.
	2. Recommend IOP Phase One only. Pt continues to drink under age 18 since DUI.  Pt maybe a heightened risk due to genetic predispos.
	a. Pt reports susceptibility to peer pressure.  Reports he began smoking again due to peer influence.  Dvlp peer refusal.  Pt has had steady relationship, s.t. daily with alcohol since pre-adolescence.  Uses alcohol in social settings and uses nicotine to reduce stress.  Current peer group including new g/f consumes alcohol.
	Rec: Identify and begin to utilize social activities not related to alcohol.  Dvlp alternative means of stress reduction.  Include other pro-social behaviors in tx.

021217:	NAVDRUGLAB, San Diego, CA, reported Applicant’s urine sample, received 021211, tested positive for THC.

021218:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 112a:
	Specification: In that Aviation Machinist’s Airman W_ C. R_(Applicant), U.S. Navy, Helicopter Combat Support Squadron THREE, on active duty, did on or about 021209, wrongfully use a controlled substance to wit: marijuana.
	Award:  Reduction to E-2.  No indication of appeal in the record.

021219:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with the least favorable characterization of service as under other than honorable by reason of misconduct-drug abuse.

021219:	Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult with counsel, elected to waive all rights except the right to obtain copies of the documents used to support the basis for the separation.

030114:	Commanding Officer, Helicopter Combat Support Squadron THREE, recommended to Commander Naval Air Forces, U.S. Pacific Fleet that Applicant be discharged under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct - drug abuse.  Commanding Officer’s comments:  “ADAA R_ (Applicant) tested positive for marijuana use during a command urinalysis.  This command places significant emphasis on not using drugs.  ADAA R_ attended our indoctrination course where I specifically addressed the issue of drug use and the Navy’s policy of ‘zero tolerance’ towards drug abuse.  He has blatantly disregarded my guidance as well as Navy regulations.  Per enclosure (1), ADAA R_ has waived his right to administrative board proceedings, accordingly I recommend his separation from the Naval Service with an Other Than Honorable discharge.”

030123:	Medical evaluation at Substance Abuse Rehabilitation Department by N_ R. F_, LCSW, Licensed Independent Practitioner.
	This 19 year old, single male, active duty with 1 year active service, was referred for a substance abuse evaluation due to command urinalysis sweep conducted 021209.  Pt (Applicant) tested positive for THC.
Pt explained he made a bad choice but does not have a problem.  Wants treatment to show a future employer if asked if he got help.  Pt remorseful and explains he made a bad choice and does not plan to use again.
	AXIS I: Cannabis dependence in full sustained remission. 304.3
	Alcohol abuse. 305.0
	Nicotine dependence. 305.1
	GAF = 70 (current).
	Recommendation:
	1.  Substance abuse treatment is indicated.  Recommended:  Phase 1 Intensive outpatient treatment.

030124:	Commander, Naval Air Force, U.S. Pacific Fleet, directed the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct - drug abuse.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 20030212 by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse (A and B) with a service characterization of under other than honorable conditions.  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).  

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.

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.  Reenlistment policy of the naval service is promulgated by the Commander, Navy Recruiting Command, 5722 Integrity Drive, Bldg 784, Millington, TN 38054.  Neither a less than fully honorable discharge nor an unfavorable "RE" code is, in itself, a bar to reenlistment.  A request for a waiver is normally done only during the processing of a formal application for enlistment through a recruiter.  

The following is provided for the edification of the Applicant.  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 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 post-service documentation to consider mitigating the misconduct that resulted in the characterization of discharge.  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 additional evidence related to this 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.

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