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

 ex-STSSA, USN
Docket No. ND03-00172

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20021105.  The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable.  The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review.  The Applicant did not designate a representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20040617.  After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the Applicant’s service was discovered by the NDRB.  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 3630600.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

“Honorable gentlemen fo this board, I beseech you to consider the evidence presented as substantial cause to upgrade my current UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS discharge to HONORABLE.  I believe that my post-service behavior merits an upgrade in discharge status for the following reasons:

Issue 1.  Use DOCUMENT 1.
I earned a Bachelor’s and a Master’s degree in four and a half years, with a GPA not less than 3.3.  My academic accomplishments contradict my UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS discharge for misconduct as a predictor of future behavior.

Issue 2.  Use DOCUMENT 2.
I have been gainfully employed by Concurrent Technologies Corporation, a non-profit engineering firm with several major Navy GSA contracts, since 20000508.  My sustained employment and work accomplishments contradict my UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS discharge for misconduct as a predictor of future behavior.

Issue 3.  Use DOCUMENT 3.
I have been an upstanding citizen in my community since my discharge.  My civic conduct contradicts my UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS discharge for misconduct as a predictor of future behavior.”

Documentation

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

Copy of DD Form 214
DOCUMENT 1 – University of South Florida official transcript
DOCUMENT 2 – concurrent Technologies Corporation W-2 (2000- 2001), Direct Deposit stub
DOCUMENT 3 – City of Tampa Police Department Criminal check

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	900509 - 900723	COG
	Active:   None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  900724		Date of Discharge:  960305

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    05  07  12
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  18			Years Contracted:  4 (24 months extension)

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  73

Highest Rate:  STS3

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  NMF*	Behavior:  NMF		OTA:  NMF

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  NDSM, NEM, SSDR, CGSOR, Marksmanship Ribbon (.45 Cal Pistol – sharpshooter)

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None

*No Marks Found in service record.

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

GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/MISCONDUCT, authority:  NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

910912:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 111:  Drunken or reckless driving.
Award:  Forfeiture of $200.00 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to E-1.  No indication of appeal in the record.

911004:	Recruit Medical Annex/Branch Medical Clinic, NTC, Great Lakes, IL:
19 year old male with DUI on 25 Aug 91.  Referral from CAAC/DAPA and command.  Frequency – 6 beers a week.  No history of other alcohol related incidents.  Father with alcoholism died when pt age 3.  Pt does not fulfill DSM111r CRITERIA FOR ALCOHOL DEPENDENCY.  Level II advised by CAAC.  Agree with that recommendation.

950706:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 128 (2 Specs)
Specification 1:  Assault upon a petty officer
Specification 2:  Assault consummated by a battery
	Award:  Forfeiture of $200.00 per month for 2 months( suspended for 6 months), restriction and extra duty for 28 days, reduction to next inferior pay grade (suspended for six months).  No indication of appeal in the record.

951218:	Punishment of reduction in rate and forfeiture of $200 pay per month for two months, suspended at CO’s NJP of 06JUL95 vacated due to continued misconduct.

951218:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 111:  Drunken or reckless driving.
	Award:  Forfeiture of one-half months pay per month for 2 months (suspended), restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to E-2.  No indication of appeal in the record.

960202:	Medical Dept, Submarine Squadron Two:  CAAC eval reviewed.  Previous Level II for DUI (1991).  
	Assessment/Plan:  Agree with diagnosis of alcohol dependent, not physically dependent.  Offer Level III upon discharge.  Detox not indicated.

ADMIN DISCHARGE PACKAGE NOT CONTAINED IN SERVICE RECORD

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 19960305 with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (A).  In the absence of a discharge package, the Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (B) and, after a thorough review of available records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, found that the discharge was proper and equitable (C and D).

Issues 1, 2 & 3:  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.  At this time, the Board determined that the documentation submitted by the Applicant concerning his post-service does not mitigate his misconduct while on active duty.  Relief denied.  

In the Applicant’s case, the Board could discern no impropriety or inequity and therefore considered the Applicant’s discharge proper and equitable. A characterization of service of general (under honorable conditions) is warranted when the service member’s conduct constitutes a departure from that expected of a Sailor.  The Applicant’s service record is marred by award of non-judicial punishment (NJP) on three separate occasions including violation of UCMJ, article 111 thus substantiating the misconduct.  The Applicant’s summary of service clearly reflects the Applicant’s disobedience of the orders and directives that regulate good order and discipline in the naval service, and demonstrated he was unsuitable for further service. An upgrade to honorable would be inappropriate.  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 documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments or any other evidence related to his discharge 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 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