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

ex-RMSR, USN 
Docket No. ND03-01106

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20030612.  The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions.  The Applicant requests 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 20040430.  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: BAD CONDUCT/Convicted by special court martial, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3640420.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

1.  “In April 1997, I received a bad conduct discharge from the United States Navy.  The discharge was based on the grounds that I distributed sativa on or about August 1995, while serving active duty in the armed forces.  During a Special Martial I received a six-month sentence and was ordered to pay $1800 in fines.  My rank was stripped from E-5 to E-1 and I was processed out of the military.  I am seeking to have my discharge upgraded.  I am very remorseful for the bad decision I made as a young sailor.  I have caused great embarrassment to U. S. Navy, my family, and myself I know my actions not only affected my career but also the careers of others.  This act has affected my life in many ways in the years that past.  Because the military made such a positive impact on my life, my realization that I destroyed such a great opportunity nearly destroyed me.  Upon leaving the Navy, it has been very hard for me to maintain a stable relationship and stable employment.  It was not until recent that I begun to put my life in prospective and adjust to civilian life.  In doing so, I found the courage to ask for forgiveness and a second chance at life.  I feel that in recent years I have suffered enough.  I carry the weight of my actions on a daily basis, as if a dark cloud is upon me and will not be lifted until this discharge is satisfied.  If you see fit to upgrade my discharge to a satisfactorily level, I plan to go back to school and become an educator and mentor.  In becoming an educator and mentor my hope and dream is to prevent as many youths possible from traveling the same road of destruction that I have traveled.  I feel that through education, I can continue to encourage youths on the value of serving their country, and becoming productive citizens.I will not attempt to justify the reasons I committed the act that lead to my dismissal.  There is no reason good enough to participate in the sale of sativa.  However, I can truly say that this was my first and last criminal act.  I have maintained a life free from crime, and I have no criminal record as a civilian.  Before my discharge I served in the United States Navy for eight years, serving with dignity and pride.  So please review my record of service and let my record speaks for itself.  Thanking you in advance for your time and consideration.

C_ D_ J_ (Applicant).”

Documentation

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

Applicant’s DD Form 214 (2)
One hundred and fifty-three pages from Applicant’s service record

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	870204 - 870208	COG
	Active:   USN 			870209 - 901025	HON

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  901025		Date of Discharge:  970403

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    06  05  08	Does not exclude lost time
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  25			Years Contracted:  6

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  50

Highest Rate:  RM2

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  3.92 (5)	Behavior:  4.00 (5)		OTA:  3.92

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  NDSM, SASM with Bronze Star, NAM, SSDR (3), BER, KLM, AFEM (2), MUC, GCM

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:

950823:	Applicant to pretrial confinement.

951101:	Special Court Martial
	Charge I: violation of the UCMJ, Article 112A (2 specs):
	Specification 1: Wrongfully distribute about 0.07 pounds of marijuana on 950822.
	Specification 2: Wrongfully introduce about 0.07 pounds of marijuana onto an installation used by armed forces or under control of the armed forces on 950822.
	Findings: to Charge I and specifications 1 and 2 thereunder, guilty.
	Sentence: CHL for 6 months, forfeiture of $300 per month for 6 months, reduction to RMSR, Bad Conduct discharge.
	CA 960528: Sentence approved and ordered executed, except for bad conduct discharge.
	SA: see SSPCMO.

951101:	Applicant to confinement.

960112:	Applicant from confinement; to appellate leave.

970124:	Applicant’s motion to withdraw case from Appellate Review granted.  

970403:	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 19970403 with a bad conduct discharge which was the sentence adjudged by a properly convened special court-martial.  That sentence was subsequently approved by both the convening and appellate review authorities (A and (B).  The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (C).

Issue 1.  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 evidence of record did not contain sufficient mitigating or extenuating factors to offset the seriousness of the offenses for which the discharge was awarded.  In addition, the reason for discharge, conviction by special court martial, is most appropriate.  Relief denied.

The following is provided for the edification of the applicant.  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 civilian life subsequent to leaving naval service.  The NDRB is authorized, however, to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge to the extent such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review.  Examples of documentation that should be provided to the Board include proof of educational pursuits, verifiable employment records, documentation of community service, and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities.  

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.  The Applicant can provide documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments or any other evidence related to her discharge at that time.  Representation at a personal appearance hearing is recommended but not required.

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.  The Manual for courts-martial authorizes the award of a punitive discharge if adjudged as part of the sentence upon conviction by a special or general court martial for violation of the UCMJ, Article 112A, (indicated the offense, such as 86- unauthorized absence for more than 30 days).

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.

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