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

 ex-UTCN, USN
Docket No. ND04-00537

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20040211.  The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to 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 20041015.  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 - 142 (formerly 3630605).

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

1.  “I feel that I served 4.5 of my 5 years honorably, and went above the call of duty during my term, I made a mistake and have since learned from that.  I would like access to my GI Bill so I may go back to school and make myself a more productive member of society, I have been at the same place of employment for 4.5 years and have advanced to a department manager.  During my disciplinary time I feel if I had been offered some sort of counseling I could have become a much better member of society, I have attended an outpatient clinic since then, during this time I learned a lot about how the drug works and have stopped completely, when I was discharged I went right back to what got me in trouble with out understanding the consequences.  I would really appreciate a good review on my file and hope to hear form you soon.  A change in my discharge would allow me to better myself for my family and my community.  Thank you for your time and considerations into this matter.”

Documentation

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

Copy of DD Form 214

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	930224 - 940109	COG
	Active:   None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  940110		Date of Discharge:  980710

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    04  06  01
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  18			Years Contracted:  4 (12 months extension)

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  75

Highest Rate:  UT3

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  3.7 (3)	Behavior:  3.3 (3)		OTA:  3.4

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  JMUA

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/MISCONDUCT, authority:  NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-142 (formerly 3630605).

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

980604:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92:  Possession of drug paraphernalia, violation of UCMJ, Article 112a (2 specs): Wrongful use and possession of marijuana, violation of UCMJ, Article 121:  Stealing 11 live M16 rounds.
	Award:  Forfeiture of $615.00 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to E-3.  No indication of appeal in the record.

980624:	Commander, Naval Air Warfare Center Weapons Division, China Lake directed the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.

Partial Discharge Package

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 19980710 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense (A).  After a thorough review of the available records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this, the Board found that the discharge was proper and equitable (B and C).  The presumption of regularity of governmental affairs was applied by the Board in this case in the absence of a complete discharge package (D).    

Issue 1:  The Applicant contends that he served the United States well and he is entitled to an upgrade.  When the service of a member of the U.S. Navy has been honest and faithful, it is appropriate to characterize that service as honorable.  An Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge is warranted when significant negative aspects of a member's conduct or performance of duty outweigh the positive aspects of the member's military record.  The Applicant’s service record is marred by award of nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for violating the UCMJ, Articles 92, 112a and 121 thus substantiating the misconduct.  Additionally, mandatory processing for separation is required for sailors who abuse illegal drugs.  The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, reflects his willful failure to meet the requirements of his contract with the U.S. Navy and falls far short of that required for an upgrade of his characterization of service.  Relief denied.

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 the service.  However, the NDRB is authorized to consider outstanding post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge, 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.  Verifiable proof of any post-service accomplishments must be provided in order for the Applicant to claim post-service conduct and behavior as a reason to upgrade a less than honorable discharge.  Evidence of continuing educational pursuits, a positive employment record, a drug free lifestyle, and certification of community service and non-involvement with civil authorities are examples of verifiable proof that can be submitted.   At this time, the Board determined that the documentation submitted by the Applicant does not mitigate his misconduct while on active duty.  

The Veterans Administration determines eligibility for post-service benefits not the Navy Discharge Review Board (NDRB).  There is no requirement or law that grants recharacterization solely on the issue of obtaining Veteran’s benefits and this issue does not serve to provide foundation upon which the Board can grant relief.  

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 his 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 18, effective 
12 Dec 97 until 29 March 2000, Article 1910-142  [formerly 3630605]. SEPARATION BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT- COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE.

B.  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. 

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 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