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

 ex-FR, USNR
Docket No. ND02-00825

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 020520, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable.  The Applicant requested a personal appearance hearing before the board in the Washington National Capital Region.  The Applicant listed the American Legion as the representative on the DD Form 293.  In the acknowledgement letter to the Applicant, the Applicant was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 030410.  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, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as submitted

1.  (Equity Issue)  This former member avers that his violations of the UCMJ were the result of a misunderstanding concerning his scheduled leave not willful misconduct.  On this basis, he opines that upgrade of his characterization of service 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 this application.

Documentation

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

Letter to the Applicant from Department of the Navy, Military Sealift Command dated February 4, 2002
Certificate of Achievement dated July 18, 1997
MSC 12310/1 Page 5 of 10
Applicant's DD Form 214

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive: None
	Active:   None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  941130		Date of Discharge:  960707

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    00  11  12	Does not exclude lost time
	Inactive:  00  07  25

Age at Entry:  19			Years Contracted:  8

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  31

Highest Rate:  FA

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  1.00 (1)	Behavior:  1.00 (1)		OTA:  1.16

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  NDSM

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  23

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

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

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

950726:	Applicant ordered to active duty.

960509:	Summary Court-Martial.
	Charge I: violation of the UCMJ, Article 86.
	Specification: Unauthorized absence from 0700, 960304 until 2130, 960327 (23 days/surrendered).
	Charge II: violation of the UCMJ, Article 87:
	Specification: Miss movement of ship on 960308.
	Finding: to Charge I and II and the specifications there under, guilty.
	Sentence: Forfeiture of $582.00, confinement for 23 days, reduced to FR.
	CA action 960515: Sentence approved and ordered executed.

960509:	Applicant to confinement.

960528:	Applicant from confinement.

960604:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.

960604:	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.

960606:	Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.

960628:	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 960707 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 and equitable (C and D).

Responding to the Applicant’s first issue, after a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the NDRB discerned there was no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the applicant's service or the assigned reason for discharge, at the time of discharge.  The Applicant presented no evidence to indicate that a mistake had occurred in his discharge proceedings or that he did not actually commit the misconduct for which he was discharged.  Relief denied.

The applicant’s representative submitted the following as issue 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.  The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge.  However, 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 the civilian life subsequent to leaving the service.  Normally, to permit relief, an error or inequity must have been found to have existed during the period of enlistment in question.  Outstanding post-service conduct, 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, is considered.  The applicant provided a certificate of achievement as documentation of his post-service.  The applicant's efforts need to be more encompassing than those provided.  For example, the applicant could have produced evidence of continuing educational pursuits, a verifiable employment record, documentation of community service, and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities  in order for consideration for clemency based on post-service conduct.  At this time, the applicant has not provided sufficient documentation of good character and conduct.  Therefore, no relief will be granted.  

The Applicant is reminded that he remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing provided the application is received within 15 years from the date of discharge.  Representation at a personal appearance hearing is recommended but not required.

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 – 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 "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