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

ex-GMMSA, USN
Docket No. ND01-01042

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 010808, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions.  The applicant requested a personal appearance hearing in the Washington National Capital Region.  The applicant listed the Veterans of Foreign Wars as the representative on the DD Form 293.  Subsequently to the application the board converted the case to a documentary review because the applicant failed to respond to the Scheduling Notice.  Applicant is not eligible for further review by this Board.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 020619.  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/Misconduct - Pattern – frequent involvement of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

1.  My Discharge was one misjudgment caused by trouble in my personal life and after serving 5 yrs and 4 months trouble free.  See attached letter of a brief summary of events leading up to my discharge as well as my life since getting out of the Navy.

2.  Applicant indicated above requested that Veterans Foreign Wars act as counsel concerning his application.  His records were reviewed on April 15, 2002 and the following comments are hereby submitted: The applicant had over five years of good service.  He had some personal problems that seems to have caused his down turn.  He has shown remorse for his mistake, is now married with a family & working as an electrician.

We refer this case to the Board for their careful and compassionate consideration and request the applicant's discharge be reviewed for upgrade to general under honorable conditions.

Documentation

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

Letter from applicant dated July 28, 2001

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Active:   USNR		800527 - 820309	HON
	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	800512 - 800526	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  820310		Date of Discharge:  860806

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    04  04  27
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  23			Years Contracted:  6

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  64

Highest Rate:  GMM3

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  3.01 (5)	Behavior:  3.17 (6)		OTA:  3.03

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  MUC, NER, GCM, NEM

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  4 

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/Misconduct – Pattern – frequent involvement of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities, authority:  NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

850510:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Dereliction in the performance of duties on 25Apr85.
	Award: Reduction to GMMSN.  No indication of appeal in the record.

850510:	Retention Warning from USS CALLAGHAN (DDG-994):  Advised of deficiency (Failure to properly perform assigned tasks), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning. 

850727:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 134: Failure to pay just debts on 25Jul85.
	Award: Forfeiture of $300 per month for 2 months, restriction for 45 days.  No indication of appeal in the record.

850727:	Retention Warning from US CALLAGHAN (DDG-994):  Advised of deficiency (Failure to meet financial obligations), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning. 

860124:	Modification of NJP awarded 27Jul85: Forfeiture of $300 for two months suspended.

860304:	Retention Warning from Shore Intermediate Maintenance Activity (NRMF):  Advised of deficiency (Derelict in the performance of duties and failure to pay debts), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning. 

860506:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence from 25Apr86 to 29Apr86 (4 days).
	Award: Restriction for 30 days, reduction to GMMSA.  No indication of appeal in the record.

860701:	Shore Intermediate Maintenance Activity NRMF Long Beach, CA notified applicant of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of frequent involvement of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities and commission of a serious offense.

860701:	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.

860709:	Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of frequent involvement of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities and commission of a serious offense.  Commanding officer’s comments (verbatim): GMMSA (applicant) has a continuing pattern of substandard performance.  He has difficulty in coping with personal problems and his inability to come to grasp with them has reflected in his work performance and capacity to get along with others.  His conduct remains detrimental to divisional and command morale and his actions require constant supervision and counseling. There is absolutely no doubt that GMMSA (applicant) will continue to be a burden to this command and the Navy.  Due to member's proven unreliability, unsuitability, and failure to adhere to rules and regulations.  It is strongly recommended that he be discharged from the naval service and that the characterization of discharge be under other than honorable conditions.

860725:	CNMPC directed the applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of frequent involvement of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 860806 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct pattern frequent involvement of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities (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.  A characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions is warranted when the member's conduct constitutes a significant departure of that expected of a sailor.  The applicant’s service was marred by award of nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for offenses triable by court-martial on three occasions and adverse counseling entries on other 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 a characterization of service of under honorable conditions.  While he may feel that his youth and marital problems were factors that contributed to his actions, the record is devoid of evidence that the applicant was not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions. Relief denied.

Issue 2.  The applicant’s discharge characterization accurately reflects his service to his country.  The discharge was proper and equitable.  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.  Relief denied.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560, Change 10/85, effective 
16 Dec 85 until 05 Oct 86), Article 3630600, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED MEMBERS 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