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

 ex-HTFR, USN
Docket No. ND03-00284

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 20021204, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable.  The Applicant requested a documentary record discharge review.  The Applicant did not list any representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20031017.  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: UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/Misconduct – commission of a serious offense, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

1.	“The discharge is improper because it was based on the very end of my service.  Most of my military service was extremely successful as I was a leader in boot camp as voted company “honorman”.  I have a commandment letter from the Commanding Officer of Recruit Training Command, San Diego.  I made a mistake near the end of my service that I am not proud of, nor can I take back or I would in an instant.  That mistake should not reflect my entire military career nor my career after my discharge.  I have been very successful ever since my discharge.  Every job I have held, I have become a manager or supervisor in some capacity.  I was with Staffpro Security for 13+ years.  Then I was the Security Director and Senior Event Manager for the San Diego sports arena for 31/2 years.  I am currently the lead campus supervisor for Monte Vista High School in Spring Valley, CA and have been there for 11 months. I have applied for the San Diego County Sheriff’s Department, but I was disqualified due to my discharge status.  I feel I have improved myself greatly since my discharge.  I have gained a lot of experience, knowledge, and self-confidence.  As you can see from the enclosed documents, my education expands into many areas that are valuable as a deputy sheriff.  The sheriff’s department does not accept Applicant’s that have discharges lower than “honorable.”  With exception to my mistake, I feel I have had honorable service while serving in the Navy.  That is why I am requesting for a change from “other than honorable” to “honorable.”  I have learned from my mistake and would like to start my new career.   I thank you in advance for your time and consideration.” 

Documentation

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

Copy of DD Form 214
List of references
Graduate certificate from Public Assembly Facility Management School
Letter of award from M_ P_
Campus Supervisor Workshop Series certificate of completion
Fitness and Nutrition Diploma
EMT-1 Basic certificate of completion (2 pp.)
Crowd Management Training certificate of completion
Certificate of completion of Emergency Response to Terrorism: Self-Study
Five pages from Applicant’s service record
College Transcript from Grossmont-Cuyamaca Community College District
Academic Record from San Diego Community College District
Letter of recommendation from D_ A. C_
Letter of recommendation from J_ S_
Letter of recommendation from B_ S_
Letter of recommendation from EM2 J_ E. S_
Letter of recommendation from Applicant’s wife
Letter of recommendation from J_ A. G_ II
Letter of recommendation from R_ D. S_
Letter of appreciation from J_ B_
Letter of appreciation from S_ D. S_
Letter of appreciation from L_ L_
Letter of appreciation from N_ E_

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	910715 - 910903	COG
	Active:   USN			None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  910904		Date of Discharge:  920601

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    00  07  25
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  18			Years Contracted:  2

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  58

Highest Rate:  HTFA

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  None		Behavior:  2.00 (1)		OTA:  None

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  None

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  72

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/Misconduct – commission of a serious offense, authority:  NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

920311:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86:  UA from 920217 to 920218 and UA from 920224 to 920304, violation of UCMJ, Article 87: Miss movement through design on 920224.
	Award:  Forfeiture of $392 per month for 2 months (one month’s forfeiture suspended for six months), restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to E-1.  No indication of appeal in the record.

920312:	Retention Warning:  Advised of deficiency (UA), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning. 

920428:	Vacate suspended sentence awarded at NJP on 920311.

920429:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86:  UA from 920315 to 920428.
Award:  Forfeiture of $392 per month for 2 months, bread and water for 3 days.  No indication of appeal in the record.

920507:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense as evidenced by 44 days UA.

920507:	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.

920509:	Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense. 

920515:	To UA.

0920519:	BUPERS directed the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.

920601:	Discharged in absentia.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged in absentia on 19920601 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.  A characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions is warranted when the member's conduct constitutes a significant departure from that expected of a sailor.  The Applicant’s service was marred by award of nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on two occasions, each with violations of the UCMJ that are considered serious offenses.  The Applicant was also discharged in absentia.  The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, reflects his disobedience of the orders and directives which regulate good order and discipline in the naval service, and falls short of that required for an honorable characterization of service.  An upgrade would be inappropriate.  Relief denied.

The Applicant’s discharge characterization accurately reflects his service to his country.  Normally, to permit relief, an error or inequity must have existed during the period of enlistment in question.  No such error or inequity 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, to enhance employment opportunities, or for 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, employment record, documentation of community service, certification of non-involvement with civil authorities and credible evidence of a substance free lifestyle, are examples of verifiable documentation that may be provided to receive consideration for relief, based on post-service conduct.  The Applicant’s evidence of post-service conduct was found not to mitigate the offenses for which he was discharged.  Relief not warranted.

The Applicant is reminded that he remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of his 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), effective 15 Aug 91 until 
04 Mar 93, 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