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

 ex-OS3, USN
Docket No. ND04-01224

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20040729.  The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable.  The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review.  The Applicant did not list representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20050107.  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.  “My discharge was inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident in 3 years 4 months and 29 days with no other adverse action.  Through out my decorated service and achievements I had never been accused of any UCMJ violations.  Before my discharge on 20031224 I was applying to move my eaos 90 days prior to 20040726 to attend summer school in Atlanta, GA.  I am requesting my discharge to be changed to honorable so that I may retain my MGIB and Navy College Fund to further my college education.”

Documentation

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

Applicant’s DD Form 214
Evaluations ending 010715, 020615 and 030315

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	000711 - 000725	COG
	Active:   None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  000726		Date of Discharge:  031224

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    03  04  29
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  19			Years Contracted:  4 

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  64

Highest Rate:  OS2

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  4.67 (3)		Behavior:  2.67 (3)		OTA:  3.95

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  NAM, GCM, NDSM, SSDR

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:

031204:	NAVDRUGLAB, Jacksonville, FL, reported Applicant’s urine sample, received 031201, tested positive for [THC].

031209:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 112a:  Wrongful use of a controlled substance (THC).
Award:  Forfeiture of ½ pay per month for 2 month(s), restriction and extra duty for 30 days, RIR.  No indication of appeal in the record.

031218:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.

031218:	Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights.

031218:	Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse (use).  [Extracted from CO, Carrier Groups Six ltr of 031219.]

031219:	CO, Carrier Group Six 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 20031224 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.  The Applicant states his discharge was based on one isolated incident in “3 years 4 months and 29 days.”  Despite a servicemember’s prior record of service, certain serious offenses, even though isolated, warrant separation from the naval service in order to maintain proper order and discipline.  The Applicant’s service record is marred by award of nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for illegal drug use, thus substantiating the misconduct for which he was separated.  Regulations limit the Board’s review to a determination on the propriety and equity of the discharge.  In the Applicant’s case, the Board could discern no impropriety or inequity and therefore consider his discharge proper and equitable.  Relief denied.

The Veterans Administration determines eligibility for post-service benefits not the Navy Discharge Review Board.  There is no requirement or law that grants recharacterization solely on the issue of obtaining Veterans' benefits and this issue does not serve to provide a foundation upon which the Board can grant relief.  The Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational opportunities.  Regulations limit the Board’s review to a determination on the propriety and equity of the discharge.  

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.  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