DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 
		    BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

						SMW
											Docket No: 7802-06 
											26 January 2007

From:	Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records
To:	Secretary of the Navy

Subj:	REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD 

Ref:	(a) 10 U.S.C. 1552

End:	(1) Case Summary
(2) Subject’s naval record

1.	Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the Navy Reserve, applied to this Board requesting an honorable characterization of service vice the
characterization of under honorable conditions assigned on 2 March 1980.

2. The Board, consisting of Ms. , Ms. and Mr. reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 24 December 2007, and pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of the enclosures, naval records, and applicable statutes, regulations and policies.

3.	The Board, having reviewed all the facts of record pertaining to Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice finds as follows:

a.	Before applying to this Board, Petitioner exhausted all administrative remedies available under existing law and regulations within the Department of the Navy.

b.	Although Petitioner’s application was not filed in a timely manner, it is in the interest of justice to waive the statue of limitations and review the application on its merits.

c.	Petitioner enlisted in the Navy Reserve on 18 March 1977 at age 18, and began a three year period of active service on 30 March 1977.

d.	On 10 June 1977 Petitioner married, and on 4 November 1977 he reported for duty as a barber aboard the USS O’BRIEN (DD975).

	e.	On 31 January 1978 a service record entry stated that Petitioner received evaluation marks below 3.0 due to his performance as a barber, specifically, unexcused absences and occasional deviation from orders.

	f.	On 31 July 1978 a service record entry stated that Petitioner’s performance improved, but he still did not always make himself available to customers during prescribed hours.

g.	On 20 August 1978 Petitioner’s daughter was born.

h.	A medical evaluation of 31 January 1979 stated that Petitioner had been referred for an evaluation by the chaplain, when Petitioner indicated that he was having a personality conflict with his immediate supervisor. The evaluation found that he had no personality disorder, but he did have nervous tension secondary to a personality conflict.

i.	On 30 April 1979 Petitioner received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for making a false official statement. Punishment extended to ten days of extra duty and a suspended reduction in rank.

j.	On 2 March 1980 Petitioner was released from active duty under honorable conditions within three months of the expiration of his active obligated service. At that time, Petitioner’s final overall trait and military behavior mark averages were 2.99 and 2.95, respectively. On 17 March 1983 Petitioner was separated with a general discharge due to expiration of his six-year military obligation.

k.	In his application, Petitioner states that he did his job and served his term in the Navy with honor and respect. Petitioner further states that during his enlistment he was trying to do too much as a newly married young Sailor and that his daughter was born while he was aboard ship. Petitioner further states that he would like his family to be proud of him when he is laid to rest. Petitioner believes that he received a general discharge because of a personality conflict with his supervisor, and he requests an honorable discharge.

1.	According to regulations, characterization of service is determined by overall traits and military behavior averages computed from marks assigned on a periodic basis. At the time of Petitioner’s service, averages of 2.7 in overall traits and 3.0 in military behavior were required for a fully honorable characterization of service.

CONCLUSION:

Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, the Board concludes that Petitioner’s request warrants relief. Although the characterization of service was in accordance with regulations, the Board believes that Petitioner’s contention of a personality conflict is substantiated by the medical evaluation of 31 January 1979. The Board also considered Petitioner’s youth at the time of his enlistment, marriage, and the birth of his child. Additionally, Petitioner’s disciplinary infraction was relatively minor, as shown by the relatively light punishment he received at NJP, and he served more than 27 at sea. Furthermore, Petitioner’s final military behavior average was only slightly below the required average for a fully honorable characterization of service. Therefore, the Board concludes that as a matter of clemency, Petitioner’s characterization of service should be changed to honorable.

RECOMMENDATION:

a.	That Petitioner’s Naval record be corrected to show that he was honorably released from active duty on 2 March 1980, vice the release under honorable conditions actually issued on that date.

b.	That Petitioner’s naval record be further corrected to show that he was honorably discharged on 17 March 1983, vice the general discharge actually issued on that date.

c.	That a copy of this Report of Proceedings be filed in Petitioner’s Naval record.

d.	That upon request, the Veterans Administration be informed that Petitioner’s application was received by the Board on 6 September 2006.

4. It is certified that a quorum was present at the Board’s review and deliberations, and that the foregoing is a true and complete record of the Board’s proceedings in the above entitled matter.

ROBERT D. ZSALMAN	ALAN E. GOLDSMITH
Recorder	Acting Recorder

5. Pursuant to the delegation of authority set out in Section 6(e) of the revised Procedures of the Board for Correction of Naval Records (32 Code of Federal Regulation, Section 723.6(e)) and having assured compliance with its provisions, it is hereby announced that the foregoing corrective action, taken under the authority of reference (a), has been approved by the Board on behalf of the Secretary of the Navy.

ROBERT D. ZSALMAN
Acting Executive Director