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

 ex-SA, USN
Docket No. ND01-00951

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 010717, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable.  The applicant requested 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 020221.  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 unanimous that the character of the discharge shall not change.  The discharge shall remain: UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

1.  The discharge that I received from the Navy was improperly imposed upon me.  Due to the fact that I was faithful to my country and took pleasure in defending her.  When on duty I gave my commanding officer 110%.  My evaluations and awards that I received support the sincerity of this application.  By trying to excel through the ranks and be the best at my job I wanted to show the Navy that I was a good investment. However, I realize that foolish and immature decisions wee made on my behalf, and I truly and deeply regret them.  I do no regret joining the Navy, I enjoyed serving my country.  Also I have come to a point in my life that I cannot dwell on the mistakes of my past.  I learned from the mistakes I made in the Navy and I am a better person today with a bright future ahead of me. I am a born again Christian, I have not been in any trouble with the law.  I have also held a steady job for almost 5 years.

Documentation

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

Evaluation Report and Counseling Record dated January 15, 1996
Copy of letter of appreciation dated February 1995 (2)
Enlisted Performance Evaluation Record dated February 17, 1995
Examination Profile information
Recommendation for advancement worksheet dated March 25, 1995
Copy of certificate of completion dated July 1, 1994
Copy of letter of commendation dated April 1 to August 31, 1994
Copy of Sailor of the Month Award for Month of February 1995
Copy of certificate dated March 21, 1995
Copy of DD Form 214

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Active:   None
	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	921027 - 930124	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  930125		Date of Discharge:  961016

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    03  08  22
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  19			Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  35

Highest Rate:  SN

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  3.80 (1)	Behavior:  4.00 (1)		OTA:  3.80	4.0 evals*
Performance:  4.00 (1)	Behavior:  4.00 (1)		OTA:  4.00	5.0 evals*

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  NDSM, AFEM, NATO, SASM with 1 Bronze Star, SSDR

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None

*Extracted from supporting documents submitted by the applicant

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT, authority:  NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

950522:	Summary Court-Martial.
	Charge I: violation of the UCMJ, Article 91:
	Specification: Disrespectful in language on 22Apr95.
	Charge II: violation of the UCMJ, Article 92:
	Specification: Failure to obey lawful order on 22Apr95.
	Charge III: violation of the UCMJ, Article 128:
	Specification: Assault on 22Apr95.
	Finding: to Charge I, II and III and specifications thereunder, guilty.
	Sentence: Confinement for 20 days, reduction to SA.
	CA action 950522:  Sentence approved and ordered executed.

950522:	Applicant to confinement.

950608:	Applicant from confinement.

961016:	DD Form 214: Discharge applicant under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct, authority:  NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

Discharge package missing.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 961016 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct (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 and equitable (C and D).

Issue 1.  The Board found that the applicant’s performance evaluations and commendatory awards do not mitigate the applicant’s misconduct. A characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions 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 award of nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for offenses triable by court-martial on one occasion and a Summary Court-Martial on two occasions.  The applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, reflects his willful disobedience of the orders and directives which regulate good order and discipline in naval service, and falls short of that required for an honorable characterization of service.  Relief denied.

Normally, to permit relief, an error or injustice must have existed during the period of enlistment in question.  No such error or injustice occurred during the applicant’s enlistment.  Additionally, 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, an employment record, documentation of community service, certification of non-involvement with civil authorities and proof of his not using drugs, are examples of verifiable documents that should have been provided to receive consideration for relief, based on post-service conduct.  The applicant did not provide sufficient documentation to warrant an upgrade to his discharge.  He is reminded that he remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of his discharge.  The applicant can provide additional documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments at that time.  Legal representation at a personal appearance hearing is highly recommended but not required.  Relief denied.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C, Change 9, effective 
22 Jul 94 until 02 Oct 96), Article 3630600, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT – A PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT. 

B.  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.  

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 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 “afls10.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