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

ex-ATAN, USN
Docket No. ND03-01337

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20030806.  The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable.  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 20040712.  After a thorough review of the available 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/IN LIEU OF TRIAL BY COURT MARTIAL, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-106 (formerly 3630650).

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

1.  “My discharge is improper because I was a model sailor.  I had a substance abuse and depression problem outside of work which I have since resolved”

2.  “I was discharged from the Navy for using drugs in an attempt to end my own life.  It was an incredibly stupid idea as an escape from family problems.  I realize what a mistake it was, and I regret it everyday.  I have since gotten help and I have lived as a model member of society.  I am now an elections apprentice.  I am also a father of one and I have one on the way.  I love the Navy and always have.  I would feel much prouder If I could have a more honorable record and maybe one day serve my country again.  The right way.

Thank you for your consideration,

D_ C_ E_ II
(social security number deleted)”

Documentation

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

Applicant’s DD Form 214
C School class average sheet
Citation from Commanding Officer, dated September 26, 2000 (2)
Letter of Appreciation, dated August 27, 2000 (2)
Letter from Applicant, undated
Transcript summary, dated September 20, 2000
Letter from Applicant, undated
Travel certificate, Separation without order, dated September 7, 2001
Job verification, unsigned dated May 13, 2004

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Active:   None
	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	000122 - 000328	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  000329		Date of Discharge:  010907

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    01  05  09
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  22			Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  13			AFQT:  90

Highest Rate:  ATAN

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  3.00 (1)	Behavior:  3.00 (1)		OTA:  3.00

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/IN LIEU OF TRIAL BY COURT MARTIAL, authority:  NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-106 (formerly 3630650).

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

010209:	Competence for duty examination: Applicant still experiencing cardiovascular and possibly (neurovascular) effects of alcohol.  Anticipate full duty tomorrow morning.  Released to custody.

010724:	Applicant to Addiction Rehabilitation Clinic (ARC).

010806:	ARC diagnosis: Axis I: Alcohol dependence, without physiological dependence, Cocaine abuse.  Axis II: Personality disorder NOS by history with borderline features.

010907:	DD Form 214:  Applicant separated under other than honorable conditions in lieu of trial by court martial, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-106.

*Discharge package not in service record
PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 20010907 under other than honorable conditions in lieu of a trial by court-martial (A and B).  In the absence of a discharge package, the Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (C) and, after a thorough review of the available records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, found that the discharge was proper and equitable (D and E).

Issue 1.  Despite a servicemember’s prior record of service, certain serious offenses, even though isolated, warrant separation from the naval service in order to maintain proper order and discipline.  The Applicant requested discharge for the good of the service to escape trial by court-martial.  In the Applicant’s case, the Board could discern no impropriety or inequity and therefore consider his discharge proper and equitable.  Relief denied.

The Applicant contends that his problems in the Navy can be attributed to his "substance abuse and depression".  While he may feel that his substance abuse was the underlying cause of his misconduct, the evidence of record did not show that the Applicant was either not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions.  Relief on this basis is denied.

Issue 2.  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.  Normally, to permit relief, a procedural error or inequity 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, is considered.  In addition to documentation of the Applicant’s service, the applicant provided one letter of employment verification as documentation of his post-service.  The applicant's efforts need to be more encompassing than those provided.  For example, the applicant could have produced evidence of continuing educational pursuits, a verifiable employment record, documentation of community service, certification of non-involvement with civil authorities and evidence of drug free existence in order for consideration for clemency based on post-service conduct.  At this time, the applicant has not provided sufficient documentation of good character and conduct.  Therefore, no relief will be granted.  He is encouraged to continue with his pursuits and is reminded that he is eligible for a personal appearance hearing provided the application is received within 15 years from the date of discharge.  Relief denied.

Concerning reenlistment, the NDRB has no authority to change reenlistment codes or make recommendations to permit reentry into the naval service or any other of the Armed Forces.  The NDRB has no jurisdiction over reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Navy or Marine Corps.  Reenlistment policy of the naval service is promulgated by the Commander, Navy Recruiting Command, 5722 Integrity Drive, Bldg 784, Millington, TN 38054.  Neither a less than fully honorable discharge nor an unfavorable "RE" code is, in itself, a bar to reenlistment.  A request for a waiver is normally done only during the processing of a formal application for enlistment through a recruiter.  

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 29, effective 
11 Jul 2000 until 21 Aug 2002, Article 1910-106 (formerly 3630650), SEPARATION IN LIEU OF TRIAL BY COURT-MARTIAL.

B.  A punitive bad conduct discharge may be adjudged for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

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