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

 ex-SA, USN
Docket No. ND03-00410

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20030114.  The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions and the reason for the discharge be changed to good of the service.  The Applicant requests 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 20031215.  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 and narrative reason 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.  “My discharge was inequitable because it was based on one offense, for which I was punished and served my sentence.  The discharge was a punishment the court martial authority did not order.  I respectfully request an upgrade in the character of my discharge and a change of the reason.  Thank you.”

Documentation

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

None.

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	900227 - 900514	COG
	Active:   USN			None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  900515		Date of Discharge:  911115

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    01  06  01
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  19			Years Contracted:  4 

Education Level:  10			AFQT:  56

Highest Rate:  SA

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  3.00 (1)	Behavior:  3.00 (1)		OTA:  3.20

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  NDSM

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  32

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:

910115:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Absent without leave.
Award:  Forfeiture of $100.00 pay per month for 1 month, restricted to SSN 691 for 14 days (suspended for 3 months), oral reprimand.  No indication of appeal in the record.

910912:	Summary Court-Martial.
	Charge I:  violation of the UCMJ, Article 86 (4 Specs): Unauthorized absence.  Charge II: violation of the UCMJ, Article 113 (2 Specs): Sleeping on watch.  Charge III: violation of the UCMJ, Article 123a (24 Specs): With intent to defraud and for the procurement of lawful currency and or merchandise wrongfully and unlawfully make a utter, a certain check upon Sovran Bank.
	Finding:  to Charge I, II, III and the specifications thereunder, guilty.
	Sentence:  Confinement for 30 days, forfeiture of $562.84 pay per month for 1 month.
	CA action 911021:  Approved findings and sentences.

910920:	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 your Summary Courts-Martial on 910912.

910924:	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.

911025:	Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense as evidenced by your Summary Courts-Martial on 910912. 

911107:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Failure to obey a lawful general regulation (Article 1137), violation of UCMJ, Article 93: Maltreatment to another member (taping individual to a chair).
	Award:  Written Letter of Reprimand, reduction in rate to next inferior pay grade.  Reduction in rate suspended for 6 months.  No indication of appeal in the record.

911107	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 in absentia 19911115 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, one summary court-martial, and unauthorized absence at the time of discharge.  The Applicant’s violation of UCMJ Articles 92 and 113 are considered serious offenses.  The Applicant could have been properly and equitably processed for administrative separation under other than honorable conditions regardless of whether or not these violations were punished at a captain’s mast or summary court-martial.  No other narrative reason more clearly describes the circumstances surrounding the Applicant’s processing for administrative separation.  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 or under honorable characterization of service.  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 is evident 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, or good conduct in civilian life, subsequent to leaving the service.  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