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

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

 ex-AN, USN
Docket No. ND06-00020

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20050922.  The Applicant requests the Discharge 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 designate a representative on the DD Form 293.  

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20061004.  
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 4-1 that the character of the discharge shall not change and by unanimous vote, the narrative reason for discharge shall not change.  The discharge shall remain General (Under Honorable Conditions) by reason of non retention on active duty.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application: 

“Respectfully Request to have my discharge code (RE-4) changed to (Re-1) because I greatly desire to re-enter the military and pursue a life long career in Serving my country with pride.  I have made some mistakes during the course of my enlistment, and, thought by Separating from the military that I would’ve had a better, more enjoyable life.  However I realized that a military life is for me.  I am willing to suffer the consequences as I have already for my poor judgment and bad behavior.  Ultimately, all I want is to re-enlist and serve my country with pride as I should have.  Please.”

Documentation

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

Applicant’s DD Form 214 (Member 4)
Applicant’s DD Form 214 (Service 2)
Applicant’s DD Form 214 (Member 1)
Applicant’s Citation for outstanding performance as a S-3 Tiger Team member, dtd July 2002 through January 2003
Applicant’s Citation for outstanding performance as V-1 Division Fly Three Aircraft Director, air Department

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive:  USNR (DEP)	20000929 – 20001018		COG
	Active:    None			

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  20001019		Date of Discharge:  20041225

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    04 02 06 (Does not include lost time.)
	Inactive:  None

Time Lost During This Period (days):  7 days	[Extracted from DD214]

Age at Entry:  18 

Years Contracted:  4 (2 months extension)

Education Level:  12				AFQT:  68

Highest Rate:  AN

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  3.0 (3) 		Behavior:  3.0 (3) 			OTA:  2.8

Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, (as listed on the DD Form 214):  Navy Unit Commendation (1), National Defense Service Medal (1), Global War on Terrorism Expeditionary Medal (1), Sea Service Deployment Ribbon (2)

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

GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/NON-RETENTION ON ACTIVE DUTY, authority:  MILPERSMAN, Article 1160-120

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events: 

000831:	Pre-service waiver for Marijuana use x 4 and PCP use as reported on the Applicant’s DD form 1966 and enlistment medical history form.

000928:	Pre-service waiver for possession of assault weapon, minor in possession of a weapon, receiving stolen property granted.

021001:            CO’s NJP held this date. [Extracted from Applicant’s service record].

040218:	Applicant to lost time [Extracted from Applicant’s DD 214].

040219:	Applicant from lost time [Extracted from Applicant’s DD 214].

041105:	Applicant to lost time [Extracted from Applicant’s DD 214].

041111:	Applicant from lost time [Extracted from Applicant’s DD 214].

040715:	Applicant agreed to a 2 month extension. New contract expiration date 041219.

041111:	Applicant’s urinalysis sample tested positive for THC

041208	Applicant’s urinalysis sample tested positive for THC

041225:	DD Form 214: Applicant discharged

Service Record did not contain the Administrative Discharge package.  
Service Record was missing elements of the Summary of Service.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 20041225 by reason of non-retention on active duty (A) with a service characterization of general (under honorable conditions). After a thorough review of the available records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper and equitable (C and D).  The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (D).

The Applicant requests an upgrade to his characterization of service to honorable. 
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.  A general 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 was marred by one nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on 20021001 and two unadjudicated violations of Article 112a of the UCMJ on 20041111 and 20041208. The last violation occurred two weeks prior to the Applicant’s EAOS.  Navy regulations require mandatory processing for violations of UCMJ Article 112a.  Violations of UCMJ Article 112a are considered serious offenses for which a punitive discharge is authorized if adjudged at a special or general court-martial.  The Command did not take the Applicant to NJP or initiate administrative processing for drugs. Instead, the Command separated the Applicant with a general characterization by reason of non-retention on active duty and assigned an RE-4 code.  The Board found no inequity or impropriety in the Applicant’s discharge.  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. The NDRB advises the Applicant that his narrative reason remarks of not recommended for continued active duty-failure to meet minimum retention requirements is appropriate based on the circumstances surrounding the Applicant’s service. The Applicant’s disregard for naval regulations and values make him unsuitable for further naval service.  Relief is not warranted.

The Applicant requests an upgrade to his RE-4 to RE-1 so he may re-enter the service. Since the NDRB has no jurisdiction over reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Navy, Marine Corps, or any other of the Armed Forces, NDRB is not authorized to change a reenlistment code.  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.  

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 additional evidence related to this discharge.  Representation at a personal appearance hearing is recommended but not required.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  Naval Military Personnel Manual, MILPERSMAN (NAVPERS 15560A), Change 21 effective 1 Sep 98 until 19 Oct 05, Article 1160-120, SEPARATION BY REASON OF NON-RETENTION ON ACTIVE DUTY

B.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part V, Para 502, Propriety.

C.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part V, Para 503, Equity.

D.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part II, Para 211, Regularity of Government Affairs.

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 “http://Boards.law.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:

		Secretary of the Navy Council of Review Boards
		Attn:  Naval Discharge Review Board
		720 Kennon Street SE Rm 309
		Washington Navy Yard DC  20374-5023