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

ex-AZAR, USN
Docket No. ND01-00400

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 010212, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable or 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 010629.  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: BAD CONDUCT/Convicted by special court martial, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3640420.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues (verbatim)

1.  I was setup & caught in the middle of people under surveillance in my squadron.

2.  Also I was tricked into making a statement which damaged my credentials.

3.  I served 3 years w/ a good conduct award & dedicated myself to serving & providing what needed to be done.  I wanted nothing but to do good for myself & the military.

4.  I have enclosed every document I have about the case.

5.  I served brig-time, received a Bad-conduct discharged, because of the people in my squadron, I was thrown in the mix & the subject under surveillance just happened to enter my barracks room after distributing to an undercover, which led to 6-8 hours of interrogation, tricked into making a statement, & this has yes changed my life forever. 

Documentation

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

Copy of DD Form 214
Service Related Documents (23pgs)

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Active:   USN 		None
	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	921016 - 930105	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  930106		Date of Discharge:  970702

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    03  02  26
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  19			Years Contracted:  4 

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  47

Highest Rate:  AZ3

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  3.90 (4)	Behavior:  3.85 (4)		OTA:  3.80 (4.0 Eval Scale)
Performance:  2.00(1)	Behavior:  1.00(1)		OTA:  2.00 (5.0 Eval Scale)

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  NDSM, SSDRw2*, JMUA, SASMw1b*, AFEM, GCA 

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None 

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

BAD CONDUCT/Convicted by special court martial, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3640420.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

930107:	Retention Warning:  Despite your defective enlistment and induction due to fraudulent entry into naval service as evidenced by your failure to disclose your pre-service civil/drug involvement: 02-92, Parking, Orlando, FL. Paid $5.00 fine; 10-92, No brake lights, Deland, FL. Paid $9.00 fine.
.
960328:	Joined Naval Brig Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, for confinement

960430:	Special Court Martial [trial date 960430]
	Charge I:  violation of the UCMJ, Article 80: Attempt to wrongfully possess marijuana with intent to distribute on 960315; Charge II: violation of the UCMJ, Article 81: (2 Specifications), Spec 1: Conspiracy to possess marijuana, Spec 2: Conspiracy to possess marijuana and cocaine; Charge III: violation of the UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence on 960229; Charge IV: violation of the UCMJ, Article 92: Violate lawful general regulation; Charge V: violation of the UCMJ, Article 112a: (5 Specifications), Spec 1: Wrongful use of cocaine, Spec 2: Wrongful use of cocaine, Spec 3: Wrongful use of marijuana, Spec 4: Wrongful use of marijuana, Spec 5: Wrongful possession of cocaine.
	Findings:  to Charge I and specification thereunder, guilty. To Charge II and specification 1 thereunder, guilty, specification 2 thereunder, Dismissed. To Charge III and specification thereunder, guilty.  To Charge IV and specification thereunder, guilty.  To Charge V and specifications 1,3, and 4 thereunder, Not guilty, to specification 2 thereunder, guilty by E&S, to specification 5 thereunder, guilty.
	Sentence:  Confinement for 120 days, reduction to E-1, Bad Conduct discharge.
	CA 960720:  Sentence approved and ordered executed, except for bad conduct discharge.
	
970225:	NMCCCA:  The findings of guilty and sentence, as approved on review, 
	are affirmed.  

970625:	COMA:  Request for appeal denied.

970702:	SSPCMO:  Article 71c, UCMJ, having been complied with, Bad Conduct discharge ordered executed.		

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 970702 with bad conduct due to convicted by a special court martial (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).

In the applicant’s issue 1, relevant and material facts stated in a court-martial specification are presumed by the NDRB to be established facts.  With respect to a discharge adjudged by a court-martial case, the action of the NDRB is restricted to upgrades based on clemency. (B, Part IV)   The applicant's case was considered under the pertinent standards of equity to determine if any factors in this particular case merited clemency.  The NDRB found the applicant’s service record devoid of any mitigating or extenuating factors sufficient to offset the seriousness of the offenses for which the discharge was awarded.  The applicant is reminded that she remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing provided that an application is received within 15 years from the date of discharge.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 14, effective 
03 Oct 96 until 14 Dec 98, Article 3640420, DISCHARGE OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL ADJUDGED BY SENTENCE OF COURT‑MARTIAL

B.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174C of 22 August 19984 (Manual for Discharge Review, 1984) enclosure (1), Chapter 2, paragraph 2.24, COURT-MARTIAL SPECIFICATION, PRESUMPTION CONCERNING.

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 "afls10.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