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

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

ex-SHSN, USN
Docket No. ND06-00275

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20051129.  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 20061019.  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 by reason of misconduct due to civil conviction.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

“To reciev VA Benefits and possible reenlistment”

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) (2)
Character Reference ltr from D_ J. S_, Manager, dtd January 29, 2006
Applicant’s pay stub from W_’s International, Inc for pay period ending December 25, 2004
Applicant’s pay stub from W_’s International, Inc for pay period ending September 18, 2005 and a deposit notice
Applicant’s pay stub from W_’s International, Inc for pay period ending May 1, 2005
Applicant’s pay stub from W_’s International, Inc for pay period ending May 15, 2005 and a deposit notice
Applicant’s pay stub from W_’s International, Inc for pay period ending December 11, 2005 and a deposit notice
Applicant’s pay stub from W_’s International, Inc for pay period ending October 30, 2005 and a deposit notice
Applicant’s Application and Enrollment Agreement for West Virginia Junior College, Inc., undtd
Applicant’s term schedule, dtd December 17, 2005
Applicant’s pay stub from W_’s International, Inc and a deposit notice

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive:  USNR (DEP)	20040109 - 20040223	COG
	Active:    None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  20040224		Date of Discharge:  20050323

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    01  01 00  (Does not exclude lost time.)
	Inactive:  None

Time Lost During This Period (days):

	Unauthorized absence:  None
	Confinement:		  Unable to determine

Age at Entry:  17 (Parental Consent)

Years Contracted:  4 (12-month extension)

Education Level:  10 GED			AFQT:  48

Highest Rate:  SHSN

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance		NA*			Behavior:  NA*	OTA:  NA*

Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, (as listed on the DD Form 214):  National Defense Service Medal, GWOT Expeditionary Medal, GWOT Expeditionary Medal (sic)

* Not Available

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/MISCONDUCT, authority: MILPERSMAN, Article 1910-144 (formerly 3630610).

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events: 

041023:	Applicant found fit for confinement.

041208:	Medical Entry:  Primary Care Clinic, Naval Branch Medical Clinic, Naval Station, Sewells, CAPT T_ E. E_, MC, USNR:  17 year old male (Applicant) presents upon recommendation of his Division Chief for counseling.  Approximately 6 weeks ago he was at the home of somebody who was helping him set up a website.  This individual discovered what is alleged to be child pornography on this patient (Applicant)’s computer and eventually notified base police.  The patient (Applicant) was then detained in the brig for 1 week.  He has not been arrested but is under investigation.  He denies knowledge of how these pictures may have gotten in his computer other than someone emailing them.  He states he feels slightly stressed, but generally feels fine.  He reports a good support group of friends and calls his mother daily.  Denies withdrawal, agitation, SI/HI.  (Illegible).  Competent/cooperative.  Cognitive memory intact.  Speech clear, linear, goal directed.  Mood – euthymic.  Affect pleasant.  
	Assessment:  Stress Reaction
	Plan:  To see (illegible) B_.  Patient (Applicant) agrees with plan.

050228:	Applicant found medically qualified for separation.

050323:	DD Form 214:  Applicant discharged this date under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to civilian conviction, authority: MILPERSMAN 1910-144.

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 20050323 by reason misconduct due to civil conviction (A) with a service characterization of under other than honorable conditions.  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 (B and C).  The presumption of regularity of governmental affairs was applied by the Board in this case in the absence of the discharge package (D). 

The Veterans Administration determines eligibility for post-service benefits, not the Naval Discharge Review Board.  There is no requirement or law that grants recharacterization solely on the issue of obtaining Veterans' benefits and this issue does not serve to provide a foundation upon which the Board can grant relief.  Additionally, the Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational opportunities.  Regulations limit the Board’s review to a determination on the propriety and equity of the discharge.  The Board found no evidence that the Applicant’s discharge was improper or inequitable.  Relief denied.

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.  The Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), re-issued October 2002, effective 22 Aug 02 until 28 April 2005, Article 1910-144 (previously 3630610), Separation by Reason of Misconduct - Civilian Conviction.

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