Author: CAP
Last saved by: Department of the Navy
Company: NCPB

Docket No. ND03-00232

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

 ex-CECA, USN
Docket No. ND03-00232

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 20021122, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions.  The Applicant requested a documentary record discharge 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 20031017.  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, I_ T. T_, do not feel that the discharge was improper or inequitable at the time.  I was told by a militant I can try an upgrade after six (6) months, in which I am trying to upgrade from other than honorable conditions to a general discharge.”

Documentation

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

Letter from Applicant dated September 10, 2002

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	960717 - 970609	COG
	Active:   USN			None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  970610		Date of Discharge:  010124

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    03  07  15
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  19			Years Contracted:  4 (12 months extension)

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  32

Highest Rate:  CECN

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  3.25 (4)	Behavior:  2.25 (4)		OTA:  2.79

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  OSR (2), NM, AFSM, NATO Medal, Rifle Sharpshooter, Pistol Sharpshooter

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:

001122:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Failure to go at the time prescribed.
Award:  Forfeiture of $563.00 pay per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 30 days, reduction to E-2 (all punishment suspended for 6 months).  No indication of appeal in the record.

001220:	NAVDRUGLAB [JACKSONVILLE, FL], reported Applicant’s urine sample, received 001205, tested positive for [THC].

001222:	Punishment of RIR to E-2, forfeiture of $563.00 pay per month for 2 months, and restriction for 30 days which was suspended at CO’s NJP on 001122 is vacated this date due to continued misconduct.

010111:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 112a: Wrongful use of marijuana on or about 001129.
	Award:  Forfeiture of $465.00 pay per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to E-1.  No indication of appeal in the record.

010111:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.

010111:	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.

010117:	Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse (use).  Commanding Officer’s comments verbatim: On 29 November 2002, CECR T_ was selected in a random sweep urinalysis conducted by this command.  On 22 December 2000, the command received a positive urinalysis message reporting CECR T_’s sample as positive for marijuana.  Despite her knowledge of the Navy’s policy on the illegal use of drugs by servicemembers, CECR T_ violated this policy.  Accordingly, I recommend that CECR T_ be administratively discharged from the Naval service with an Other Than Honorable discharge. 

010118:	Chief of Naval Education and Training authorized the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse (use).

010124:	Applicant declined alcohol and drug dependency screening.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 20010124 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to drug abuse (use) (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.  There is credible evidence in the record that the Applicant used illegal drugs.  Drug abuse warranted processing for separation, normally under other than honorable conditions.  Relief denied.

The Applicant’s discharge characterization accurately reflects her service to her country.  Normally, to permit relief, an error or inequity must have existed during the period of enlistment in question.  No such error or inequity occurred 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, or good conduct in civilian life, subsequent to leaving the service.  However, the NDRB is authorized to consider outstanding post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge, to the extent that 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, an employment record, documentation of community service, certification of non-involvement with civil authorities and evidence of a substance free lifestyle, are examples of verifiable documents that should have been provided to receive consideration for relief, based on post-service conduct.  At this time, the applicant has not provided such documentation for the Board to consider.  Relief denied.

The Applicant is reminded that she remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of her 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), Change 27, effective 27 March 2000 - 11 Feb 2001, 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

The remaining portion of this document is divided into 4 Parts: Part I - Applicant’s Issues and Documentation, Part II - Summary of Service, Part III – Rationale for Decision and Pertinent Regulation/Law, Part IV - Information for the Applicant.
INDEX: