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

ex-BTFA, USN
Docket No. ND01-00402

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 010212, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions.  The applicant requested a personal appearance hearing discharge review before a traveling panel closest to (left blank).  The applicant did not designate a representative on the DD Form 293.  In the acknowledgement letter to the applicant, he was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) does not travel, all hearings are held in the Washington, DC area.  The NDRB also advised that the board first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing.

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: UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/Misconduct – commission of a serious offense, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues (verbatim)

1.  To Whom It May Concern:  This is not going to be a sob story but it has been 10 long years since I was discharged from the U.S. Navy.  During this time, I have not been in any trouble whatsoever.  I have been to carpenter apprenticeship school, and I'm now a journeyman carpenter and receive union wages.  I've since married, and have a 3 year old son.  I was very proud to have served my country, and was willing to die for my country, and it's freedom.  I believe my military bearing was outstanding and that I was a squared away individual.  I just made a very stupid mistake and I have felt deep remorse for my actions, during the past 10 years.  What I want is to be able to title myself a "Veteran".  During my short enlistment from 05 Jul 88 to 16 Feb 91, I believe my service was Honorable, that is excluding the incident in which I was punished for.  I was a young kid who made a very dumb decision, and wish I would have done things different.  I'm now getting on with my life, and still live by what the Navy has taught me.  I would like to be able to have my GI Bill so I can go to school, and also my Veteran Home Loan to buy a house someday.  I hope you will please take this into consideration.  Thank You.

Documentation

Only the applicant's service and medical records were reviewed, as the applicant did not provide additional documentation for the Board to consider. 

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Active:   None
	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	871015 - 880704	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  880705		Date of Discharge:  910326

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    02  08  22 (Doesn't exclude lost or confinement time)
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  18			Years Contracted:  4 

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  42

Highest Rate:  BTFN

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  3.2 (2)	Behavior:  2.3 (2)		OTA:  3.2

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  None

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  5 

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/Misconduct – commission of a serious offense, authority:  NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

881104:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92:  on 88OCT29, failed to obey a lawful general order by consuming an alcoholic beverage in BEQ233.
	Award:  Forfeiture of $150 per month for 1 month, extra duty for 10 days.  No indication of appeal in the record.

881104:	Retention Warning:  Advised of deficiency (poor military performance by wrongfully consuming an alcoholic beverage in BEQ 233, and by wrongfully consuming an alcoholic beverage, under the age of 21 years), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning. 

900618:	Unauthorized absence from USS ROANOKE.

900622:	Surrendered onboard NAVSTA Long Beach (5 days).

900917:	Special Court Martial
	Charge I:  violation of UCMJ, Article 86
	Specification - Unauthorized absence from on or about 18 Jun 1990 until on or about 22 June 1990.
	Charge II:  violation of UCMJ, Article 87
	Specification - Missing ship's movement through neglect on or about 18 Jun 1990.
	Charge III:  violation of UCMJ, Article 112a (3 Specs)
	Spec 1 - Wrongfully use Lysergic Acid Diethylamide on or about 16 Jun 1990, at or near Santa Clara, CA.
	Spec 2 - Wrongfully used Psilocybin on or about 16 Jun 1990, at or near Santa Clara, CA.
	Spec 3 - Wrongfully possessed 47 individual doses of Lysergic Acid Diethylamide, with intent to distribute, on or about 16 Jun 1990, at or near Santa Clara, CA
	Charge IV:  violation of UCMJ, Article 134
	Specification - Disorderly conduct on or about 2230, 16 Jun 1990, while in Santa Clara, CA.
	Findings:  to Charge I and specification - guilty.
	Charge II and specification - guilty.
	Charge III and specifications 1, 2, and 3 thereunder - guilty
	Charge IV and specification - guilty
	Sentence:  Confinement for 75 days, forfeiture of $250 per month for 2 months and reduction to E-2.
	CA (undated):  Sentence approved and ordered executed.  Navy Brig, Naval Station, Long Beach designated as place of confinement.

900917:	To confinement (Navy Brig, NavSta Long Beach).

910114:	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 as evidence by your service record.

910114:  	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 make a statement and the right to obtain copies of the documents used to support the basis for the separation.  Applicant objected to the separation.

910123:	Medical Eval:  20 year old Caucasian male in for drug/alcohol dependency screening.  Mbr admits he used LSD twice in his lifetime, once as a civilian.  Doubt drug dependency.  Counseling needed for his alcohol consumption.  Father and brother are alcohol abusers.  Mother also a problem drinker.  Parents alcoholics.  
Provisional Diagnosis:  Alcoholic. 

910215:	Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.  Commanding officer’s comments (verbatim):  "BTFA (Applicant) enlisted in the Navy on 05JUL88 for 4 years.  It was but four months later that he was awarded NJP for violation Article 92 of the UCMJ.  On 17 Sep 90 he was awarded a SPCM for a myriad of violations of the UCMJ.  SNM seems to think the Navy is at fault for his shortcomings, and fails to take responsibility for his own actions.  His cavalier attitude as well as his total disregard for rules and regulations render him unsuitable for further military service.  I convinced that trying to rehabilitate SNM would be an exercise in futility.  Accordingly, I strongly recommend he be expeditiously discharged with an other than honorable discharge.

910302:	CNMPC 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 910326 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).

In the applicant’s issue 1, the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) is a separate agency that makes its own determinations on VA eligibility.  There is no requirement or law that grants recharacterization based solely on the issue of obtaining veteran’s benefits.  The Board encourages the applicant to contact his nearest DVA Regional Office for further information regarding his VA eligibility.  This is not an issue for which the Board will grant relief.

There is no law or regulation that provides for the upgrade of an unfavorable discharge based solely on the passage of time, or good conduct in the civilian life subsequent to leaving the Service.  However, the Board is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge (D).  Those factors include, but are not limited to, the following:  evidence of continuing educational pursuits (transcripts, diplomas, degrees, vocational-technical certificates), a verifiable employment record (Letter of Recommendation from boss), documentation of community service (letter from the activity/community group), certification of non-involvement with civil authorities (police records check) and proof of his not using drugs (detoxification certificate, AA meeting attendance or letter documenting participation in the program) in order for consideration for clemency based on post-service conduct.  At this time, the applicant has not provided any documentation of good character and conduct.  Therefore no relief will be granted.  The applicant is reminded that he is eligible for a personal appearance hearing provided the application is received within 15-years from the date of discharge.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560A), Change 8, effective 
21 Aug 89 until 14 Aug 91, Article 3630600, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT – COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE.

B.  Under the Manual for Courts-Martial, a punitive discharge is authorized for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Article 87, missing movement 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 "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