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

 ex-DPSN, USN
Docket No. ND02-00159

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 011205, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable.  The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review.  The applicant listed the Disabled American Veterans as the representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 020731.  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: GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630605.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as submitted

1.  I would like to receive an upgrade to an Honorable Discharge because I would like to serve my country once again.  I would also like to assist others in any way I can with values I have learned while serving in the US Navy.  I believe that I would also be able to gain my benefits back to assist in continuing my education.

2.  Dear Chairperson:

After a review of the Former Service Members (FSM) DD Form 293 Application for the Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the Armed Forces of the United States and all of the evidence assembled for review, we continue to note the contentions as set forth by the appellant as follows; an upgrade of the current General Under Honorable Conditions discharge to that of Honorable.

A review of the record reflects that the FSM served in the United States Navy from November 8, 1994 to November 14, 1997 at which time she received the current discharge by reason of misconduct.

Of record are character reference statements attesting to the FSM's good character while on active duty, reflecting on her as a hardworking and trustworthy individual who could be depended upon to complete assigned tasks in a timely and professional manner.

On entry the FSM was a young and impressionable teenager, who entered active duty and did well at first.  For whatever reason, whether she was mis-guided by her peers, or still maintained a level of immateriality, she committed the inappropriate act(s) and has been punished for her actions.  A punishment that her co-workers apparently believe to have been to harsh. The FSM had one circumstance of misconduct in comparison to her outstanding three years of military service.  We believe that an award of an Honorable discharge would not bring about the demise of the good order of the United States Navy and request that equitable relief is provided.  In addition, the SECNAVINST provides for the definition of an Honorable discharge and what is allowable for that character to still be authorized.  We believe the FSM did at the time of discharge and does still meet that criteria. We ask for the Board's careful and sympathetic consideration of all the evidence of record used in rendering a fair and impartial decision.  These issues do not supersede any issues previously submitted by the applicant.  Respectfully,

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

Copy of applicant's DD Form 214
Character reference dated October 24 1997
Copy of Memorandum dated October 24, 1997
Copy of statement of support dated October 24, 1997
Copy of statement of support dated October 22, 1997

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Active:   None
	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	940715 - 941107	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  941108		Date of Discharge:  971114

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    03  00  07
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  21			Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  79

Highest Rate:  Unknown

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  NMF		Behavior:  NMF		OTA:  NMF

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  JMU, NDSM

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None

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

GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/MISCONDUCT, authority:  NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630605.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

971114:	DD Form 214: Applicant discharge general (under honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.

Discharge package missing from service record.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 971114 with a general (under 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 and equitable (C and D).

Issue 1:  The applicant states, her discharge was based on one circumstance of misconduct in comparison to her outstanding three years of military service.  Due to the lack of documentation in the applicant’s service record as well as the lack of documentation provided by the applicant for consideration by the Board, there is no evidence available to support a change in characterization.  The Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the purpose of reenlistment as requested by the applicant, furthermore, the Department of Veterans Affairs determines eligibility for post service benefits not the Naval Discharge Review Board.  There is no requirement or law that grants re-characterization based upon the issue of obtaining Veteran’s benefits.  Regulations  limits NDRB review to a determination on the propriety and equity of the discharge.  In the applicant’s case the Board could discern no impropriety or inequity and therefore considered the applicant’s discharge was proper and equitable.  Request for relief denied.

The following is provided for the applicant’s information.  The NDRB is authorized to consider outstanding post-service factors in the re-characterization 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, a positive employment record, documentation of community service, certification of non-involvement with civil authorities, are examples of verifiable documents that should have been provided to receive consideration for relief, based upon post-service conduct.  The applicant did not provide any post service documentation to warrant an upgrade to her discharge.  She is reminded that she remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of her 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.  

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 14, effective 
03 Oct 96 until 971212, Article 3630605, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT – COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE.

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