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

 ex-AR, USN
Docket No. ND00-00800

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 000608, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to Honorable.  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 001206.  After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, NDRB discerned no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the applicant’s service.  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 3630605.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

1.  My discharge was inequitable, I am guilty of all charges held against me.  During the time I was in the U.S. Navy, I always respected my authorities, and respected the way things were done.  Unfortantly I got mixed up with the wrong people, people that I thought were loyal to the military, but proved me wrong, back when I was in the Navy, I was young, blind, and stupied I didn't realize that I belonged and was acepted into something special to this great nation.  I regret the things I did to get out of the Navy.  Every since my discharge.  I have changed for the better I went to rehab for the counsling, I've paid back my dues to the law, and I have grown up, by becoming a man, and taking on responsibility, I've helped people who need a hand, I've paid peoples bills, so they can afford to put diappers on there three month old son, I believe I am worthy of an honarable discharge, so I can go back into the military and help this great nation win wars, I am ready for that responsibility, please take the time you need to concider my request, please make me an honorable person, because to other's I am.  Thank you.

Documentation

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

None.

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Active:   None
	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	960716 - 961002	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  961003		Date of Discharge:  970716

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    00  09  14
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  20			Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  39

Highest Rate:  AR

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  NOB			Behavior:  2.00 (1)		OTA:  2.00

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  None 

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 3630605.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

970410:	NAVDRUBLAB, Great Lakes, IL reports applicant's urine sample received 970319, tested positive for THC.

970501:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 80: Attempt to use a stolen check in the amount of $100 from another sailor, violation of the UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence 4Mar97 to 18Mar97, violation of the UCMJ, Article 112A: Wrongfully use of a controlled substance, to wit: marijuana, violation of UCMJ Article 121: Larceny of three checks of a value of about $2, the property of another service member, violation of UCMJ Article 123: Forgery.
	Award: Forfeiture of $400 per month for 2 months, restriction for 60 days, reduction to AR.  No indication of appeal in the record.

970522:	Drug and Alcohol Abuse Report: Marijuana abuse, ashore off duty.  Unit sweep urinalysis April 10, 1997.  Abuse denied.  CAAC recommended Level III treatment.  Physician found applicant dependent and recommended separate via VA hospital.  Comments: This incident SNM tested positive for THC.  SNM diagnosed polysubstance dependent by alcohol treatment facility.  SNM has no potential for further useful service.  Recommend handle I.A.W. 5350.4B.

970606:	Applicant refused treatment for alcohol/substance abuse behavior.

970613:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under Other Than Honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the Commission of a serious offense and misconduct due to Drug abuse.

970613:  	Applicant advised of his 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.

970618:	Commanding officer recommended discharge under Other Than Honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the Commission of serious offenses in vilation of Articles 80 and 121 of the UCMJ, and misconduct due to Drug abuse. 

970701:	BUPERS directed the applicant's discharge under Other Than Honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the Commission of a serious offense.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 970716 under Other Than Honorable conditions for misconduct due to Commission of a serious offense (A and B).  The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (C).  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 (D and E).

Issue 1.  The Board determined this issue is without merit.  The applicant claims he is a better man, provides a helping hand to others in need and pays bills for people that need to put diapers on there three month old son.  The applicant failed to provide any documentation to support his claim.  Relief denied.

The following is provided for the applicant’s benefit.  The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge.  The applicant must be aware that 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 the civilian life subsequent to leaving the service.  Normally, to permit relief, an error or injustice must have been found to have existed during the period of enlistment in question.  Outstanding post-service conduct, 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, may be considered by the NDRB.  Documentation to support any such claim must be provided in order to receive consideration for post-service accomplishments.

The applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing provided an application is received at the NDRB within 15 years of the date of his discharge. 

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 14, effective 
03 Oct 96 until 971212, Article 3630605, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT – COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE.

B.  In Appendix 12 of the Manual for Courts-Martial, a punitive discharge is authorized for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Article 112a, for drug abuse, Article 121, for larceny and Article 123, for forgery and if adjudged at a Special or General Court Martial

C.  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.  

D.  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.

E.  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