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

ex-FR, USN
Docket No. ND02-01051

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 020722, 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 030424.  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

TO BE SUBMITTED BY AMERICAN LEGION

1.  (Equity Issue) This former member proffers that youth, immaturity, and marital problems contributed to and sufficiently mitigated his misconduct of record to warrant recharacterization of his service period to honorable.

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:

Four pages from Applicant's service record
Letter from Applicant
Job reference, undated
Character/job reference, undated
Aptitude Based Career Decision Report, dated March 24, 1999

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	930123 - 930209	COG
	Active:   None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  930210		Date of Discharge:  940704

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    01  04  25
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  19			Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  84

Highest Rate:  FN

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  3.00 (2)	Behavior:  2.80 (2)		OTA:  2.80

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  NDSM

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None

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:

930729:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 107: Sign an official record, with intent to defraud, on 930722, to wit: night study log.
	Award: Forfeiture of $250 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 30 days, reduction to FA.  No indication of appeal in the record.

940404:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 112A: Wrongfully use marijuana on 940302.
	Award: Forfeiture of $150 per month for 2 months, extra duty for 45 days, reduction to FR.  No indication of appeal in the record.

940425:	Applicant notified of amended intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense as evidenced by all NJPs in your current enlistment and misconduct due to drug abuse as evidence by your statement confessing to drug abuse.

940426:	Applicant advised of his rights and having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to appear before an Administrative Discharge Board.

940505:	An Administrative Discharge Board, based upon a preponderance of the evidence and by unanimous vote, found that the Applicant had committed a serious offense and drug abuse, that the misconduct warranted separation, and by a vote of 2 to 1 recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions.

940610:	Summary Court-Martial.
	Charge I: violation of the UCMJ, Article 121 (2 specs).
	Specifications: Commit larceny and wrongful appropriation on 940418 to 940422.
	Charge II: violation of UCMJ, Article 130 (2 specs):
	Specifications: Commit housebreaking on 940418 to 940422.
	Finding: to Charge I and II, and the specifications thereunder, guilty.
	Sentence: Confinement for 30 days.
	CA action 940610: Sentence approved and ordered executed.

940610:	Applicant to confinement.

940615:	Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense and misconduct due to drug abuse.

940629:	BUPERS directed the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.

940704:	Applicant released from confinement.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 940704 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).

Issue 1:  Regulations limit the Board’s review to a consideration of the propriety and equity of a discharge.  Although the Applicant claims his youth, immaturity and marital problems contributed to his misconduct, 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.  A characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions is warranted when the service member’s conduct constitutes a significant departure from that expected of a sailor.  The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of service, reflects his disobedience of the orders and directives that regulate good order and discipline in the naval service, and falls far short of that required for an honorable characterization of service.  An upgrade to honorable would be inappropriate.  Relief denied.

Issue 2:  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, a positive employment record, documentation of community service, certification of non-involvement with civil authorities, and credible evidence that the Applicant is living a drug free lifestyle, are examples of verifiable documents that should be provided to receive consideration for relief, based on post-service conduct.  After a complete review of the record, including the evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board determined that the Applicant’s discharge was proper and equitable and that his evidence of post service accomplishments was found not to mitigate the misconduct for which he was discharged.  Relief denied.

The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of discharge.  The Applicant can provide additional documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments at that time.  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 5, effective 
05 Mar 93 until 21 Jul 94, 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, Articles 107, 112a, 121 and 130 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 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