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

  ex-AR, USN
Docket No. ND03-00168

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 20021106, 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 20031003.  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

1.  “I respectfully request the charge of my discharge to an honorable discharge.  I made a mistake while in the U.S. Navy.  I feel that I paid for that mistake.  Upon review of my records you should notice my qualification that I completed after my return from being U.A.  I worked very hard because I realized I really wanted to stay in the Navy.  I regret more than anyone will ever know the mistake that I made.  I think about it every day of my life.  I would give anything to take it back.  I need my honorable discharge to persue my dream of being a pilot.  I would like for you to really consider giving me an honorable discharge.”

Documentation

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

Applicant’s DD Form 214 (Member 1 and 4)
Police record check dated November 18, 2002
Eight pages from Applicant’s service

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	19980424 - 19980708	COG
	Active:   None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  19980709		Date of Discharge:  20000613

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    01  11  05
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  19			Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  46

Highest Rate:  AN

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):*

Performance:  3.33 (3)	Behavior:  2.33 (3)		OTA:  2.83

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  NER (2), AFEM, SSDR

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  161

*Marks extracted from supporting documents provided by the Applicant

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:

990823:	Applicant to unauthorized absence 0700, 990823.

990915:	Applicant missed ship’s movement.

990923:	Applicant declared a deserter.

990925:	Applicant missed ship’s movement.

991202:	Applicant missed ship’s movement.

000121:	Applicant missed ship’s movement.

000203:	Applicant apprehended by Madison County Sheriff’s office, Jackson, TN at 1410, 000203 for drug possession.

000204:	Applicant returned to military authority at NACIC, at 1530, 000204.

000210:	Applicant returned to USS DWIGHT D EISENHOWER (CVN 69) at 1425, 000210 (161 days)

000613:	DD Form 214: Applicant discharged under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse (use), authority:  NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-146.

Discharge package missing from service record.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 20000613 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to drug abuse (use) (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 that he made a mistake while enlisted and paid for it.  Now he needs his Honorable discharge to pursue his dream of becoming a pilot.

The NDRB agrees that the Applicant made a mistake in committing the misconduct that lead to his discharge.  However, the Board will not upgrade an Applicant’s discharge for the purpose of obtaining better employment.  Normally, to permit relief, an error or inequity must have occurred during the execution of the discharge for the period of enlistment in question.  No errors or inequities were discovered during the execution of this discharge.  The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge.  However, 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.  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 can be considered.  Examples of documentation to forward to the Board include proof of educational pursuits, verifiable employment record(s), documentation of community service, certification of non-involvement with civil authorities, and credible evidence of a substance free lifestyle (if appropriate).  At this time, the applicant has not provided any documentation for the Board to consider.  Therefore, no relief will be granted.

The applicant is reminded that he is eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of his discharge.  The applicant can provide additional documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments at that time.  Representation at personal appearance hearing is recommended but not required.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  The Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 27, effective 27 March 2000 - 11 Feb 2001, Article 1910-146 (formerly 3630620), Separation by Reason of Misconduct - 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