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

ex-MMFN(SS), USN
Docket No. ND01-00245

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 001228, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to General/under Honorable conditions.  The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review.  The applicant did not list any representative on the DD Form 293.  Subsequent to the application, the applicant obtained representation by the American Legion.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 010615.  After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, NDRB discerned there was no impropriety but relief is warranted under equitable grounds, even though the discharge was determined to have been otherwise equitable at the time of issuance.  The Board’s vote was 4 to 1 that the character of the discharge shall change to:  UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL)/MISCONDUCT – Commission of a serious offense, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

1.  (Equity Issue) While proper, this former member proffers that an UOTHC discharge is unusually harsh for a single UCMJ violation in light of his otherwise satisfactory service record?  On this basis, he opines separation under honorable conditions is warranted.

2.  (Equity Issue) This former member further requests that the Board include provisions of SECNAVINST 5420.174C, enclosure (1), Chapter 9, as it pertains to post-service conduct, in assessing the merits of his application.

Documentation

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

Copy of debt collection notice 
Letter from applicant dated December 15, 2000
Copy of DD Form 214

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Active:   USNR		890127 - 920123	HON
	Inactive: USNR		890117 - 890126	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  920124		Date of Discharge:  920824

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    00  07  01
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  22			Years Contracted:  6

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  31

Highest Rate:  MM3

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  1.00 (1)	Behavior:  2.80 (1)		OTA:  3.66

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  NDSM, ESI

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/MISCONDUCT – Commission of a serious offense, authority:  NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

920711:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 107: With intent to deliver, made an oral statement that he had attended an assigned delinquent study as assigned on 26 Jun 92.
	Award: Forfeiture of $543 per month for 2 months, reduction to MMFN.  No indication of appeal in the record.
920713:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under Other Than Honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the Commission of a serious offense.  [Extracted from CO's message dated 15Jul92.]

920714:	Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ, Article 27B, elected to waive all rights except the right to obtain copies of the documents used to support the basis for the separation.  [Extracted from CO's message dated 15Jul92.]

920715:	Commanding officer recommended discharge under Other Than Honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the Commission of a serious offense.  Commanding Officer’s comments:  “SNM has been a substandard performer since reporting onboard. He failed to report for a meeting with a co-worker.  Then blatantly lied to his supervisor.  At his mast he then lied to me.  He can not be trusted.  I recommend an Other Than Honorable discharge.”

920812:	BUPERS directed the applicant's discharge under Other Than Honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the Commission of a serious offense.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 920824 under Other Than Honorable conditions for misconduct due to Commission of a serious offense (A).  The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (B).  After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper but not equitable (C and D).  The Board determined that in accordance with SECNAVINST 5420.174, at the time of issuance, the discharge was inconsistent with standards of discipline in the military service of which the applicant was a member, and that the discharge characterization of Other Than Honorable, was excessive.  Relief is granted as requested.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), effective 15 Aug 91 until 
04 Mar 93, Article 3630600, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT – COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE.

B.  Under the Manual for Courts-Martial, a punitive discharge is authorized for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Article 107 (False official Statement), if adjudged at a Special or General Court-Martial.

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