Author: CAP
Last saved by: shirley.robertson
Company: NCPB

Docket No. ND03-01326

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

ex-DN, USNR
Docket No. ND03-01326

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20030805.  The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions.  The Applicant requests a documentary record review.  The Applicant did not list any representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20040526.  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 3630620.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

1.  Executive Director,

I am writing in hopes of having my discharge upgraded from the OTH that I now have.  I was unfortunately only enlisted for a short time but I knew that I picked the right branch of service.  I unfortunately at a young age (and state of mind for that matter) made an undesirable call in my social life, attempting to hang out with my civilian friends whose joke at my expense cost me a great deal.  Instead of socializing with others that shared a common goal and morals.  I upset and disappointed many people, including myself cutting my military career short.  It’s been very hard trying to forget and move ahead and given the opportunity I would join again in an instant! But sadly enough, I’ve ruined that just to 'hang out’.

Since that time I have been married, have a two-year-old daughter, and in school working towards a nursing degree, and work for one of the largest medical companies in the Pacific Northwest - Group Health Cooperative.  I attended ConCorde Career Institute in California, where I received my certification as a Medical Assistant, which has also been instrumental in my decision to become a nurse.  I presently work as a Patient Account Rep for Group Health Cooperative at 30hrs a week and attend Tacoma Community College full-time (10hrs a qtr).

Even thought my schedule seems a bit full, my daughter and I manage to have time so that home and family do not suffer.  I can't afford another let down or disappointment.  I talk to youths whenever I get a chance on the importance of making smart decisions and explain to them how their actions now can and will affect them later.

I often think about the ‘what ifs’ even though it’s too late now.  And the thought of having to tell my daughter in the future is also thought about often.  I want her to make wise choices and not worry about the ‘in crowd’ no matter how hard it may be.  Learning the hard way that they do not care about you can cost you a lot.

Please accept my request and review application on my behalf.  Thank you so much in advance for your time, consideration, and understanding.

Sincerely,
S_ L_ S_ (Applicant)

Documentation

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

Character reference from Pastoral Associate for Faith Formation, St. Patrick Parish Center, dated August 1, 2002.
Character reference from PCR LEAD, Group Health, dated August 30, 2002.

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive: None
	Active:   None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  940301		Date of Discharge:  960112

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    01  08  09
	Inactive:  00  02  02

Age at Entry:  19			Years Contracted:  8

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  65

Highest Rate:  SR

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  4.00 (2)	Behavior:  4.00 (2)		OTA:  3.90

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  NDSM

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 3630620.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

940301:	Ordered to Active duty for 3 years under Seaman Apprenticeship Guarantee

950623:	NAVDRUGLAB, San Diego/CA, reported Applicant’s urine sample, received 950620, tested positive for cocaine.

950710:	Applicant’s Voluntary Statement.

950895:	Drug and Alcohol Abuse Report:  Cocaine abuse, ashore-off duty.  Abuse denied.  Unit sweep urinalysis 950620.  Physician found Applicant not dependent and recommends separation from the service.  Commanding Officer recommends separation.  Comments:  DA S_ (Applicant) possesses an above average military record, but due to zero tolerance policy, has no potential for future naval service.

950817:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.

950829:	Applicant advised of rights and having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to appear before an Administrative Discharge Board.

951017:	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 and evidenced by her positive urinalysis of cocaine on or about 950620 that the misconduct warranted separation, and recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions.

951128:	Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse (use) as evidenced by positive urinalysis of cocaine on or about 950620.  Commanding Officer’s comments :  I strongly believe that Dentalman S_ L_ S_ (Applicant) is incapable of adhering to the rules and regulations of the Navy.  It is my belief that Dentalman S_ (Applicant) has no potential for further service in the military.  It is strongly recommended that Dentalman S_ (Applicant) be separated from the naval service immediately with an Other Than Honorable discharge.

951228:	BUPERS 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 19960112 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.  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 her conduct or that she should not be held accountable for her actions.  Relief denied.

The Applicant contends that her problems in the Navy can be attributed to being “at a young age (and state of mind for that matter).”  While she may feel that her youth was the underlying cause of her misconduct, the record clearly reflects her willful misconduct and demonstrated she was unfit for further service.  The evidence of record did not show that the Applicant was either not responsible for her conduct or that she should not be held accountable for her actions.  Relief on this basis is denied.

The following is provided for the edification of the Applicant.  Normally, to permit relief, a procedural error or inequity must have occurred during the discharge process for the period of enlistment in question.  The Board discovered no such errors 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, 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, certification of non-involvement with civil authorities, and credible evidence of a substance free.  As of this time, the Applicant has not provided sufficient documentation for the Board to consider.  Therefore, no relief is appropriate.

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 her discharge at that time.  Representation at a personal appearance hearing is recommended but not required.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  Navy Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 9/94, effective 
22 Jul 94 until 02 Oct 96, Article 3630620, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED MEMBERS BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT DUE TO 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: