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

ex-AEAA, USN 
Docket No. ND03-00946

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20030507.  The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions.  The Applicant requests a personal appearance hearing before the board in the Washington National Capital Region.  The Applicant did not list any representative on the DD Form 293.  In the acknowledgement letter, 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 20040728.  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/IN LIEU OF TRIAL BY COURT MARTIAL, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630650.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

1.  “I am submitting this document with hopes of getting a Oth upgraded to a honorable.  I feel my Discharge that was giving to me was inadequate to the crime that was committed to the penalty served for the crime.

2.  To Whom It May Concern,

There are things in life that some people regret, and things that most people don’t.  but the purpose of this letter is a regretful letter with intention of trying to bury my past and move ahead to bigger and better things.  I had the best intention of being a 4.0 sailor no matter what duty station I was at, but being a young man and away from home really made me think that life was a big party, and that is all I ever did was party, and when I look back and try to put what I did into perspective I whis I had another chance, and that other chance may be right around the corner.  Alot has happened to me since my discharge from the United States Navy, upon my arrival back to my hometown of LaPorte Indiana my old wrestling coach had asked me to become a assistant for one of our middle schools, Igladly accepted and even took on a assistant football job at the other middle school, To this day I am still coaching , but at the varsity level, and have been there for 5 years with great numbers and a positive influence on our future. I would be lying if I said that that these kids haven’t changed my outlook on life, cause they sure have.  Which is why I am currently seeking a college education to become a teacher and continue my coaching, not only for the kids but for my fiancé and my daughter because they deserve much more from me, I owe it to myself to try and better the kids of the future, to learn a great work ethic and to be more respectful to our country.  Belive it when I say that I ‘am a changed man, I need to get a discharge review and hopefully a upgrade to move on with my life, get a nice house, a better job, and a bigger family, I will make a diffrence and will not let no one down anymore.  I am submitting 2 letter-of-reccomendation to maybe help you with a descion.G0 USA!

Respectfully Yours,

B_ A_ D_ (Applicant)”

Documentation

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

Character reference from Principal, Laporte High School, dated October 23, 2002
Character reference from General Manager, Holiday Inn Express, dated October 10, 2002

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	900718 - 901210	COG
	Active:   None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  901210		Date of Discharge:  941230

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    04  00  20 (Does not exclude lost time)
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  19			Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  42

Highest Rate:  AEAN

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  3.16 (5)	Behavior:  3.08 (5)		OTA:  3.32

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  NDSM, SSDR, SASM with 1 Bronze Star, BEA

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  39

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/IN LIEU OF TRIAL BY COURT MARTIAL, authority:  NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630650.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

930824:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Fail to go to appointed place of duty on 0700-1530, 930814.
	Award:  Forfeiture of $200 per month for 1 month, extra duty for 30 days.  No indication of appeal in the record.

940525:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Fail to be at appointed place of duty on 1715, 940415 to 0718, 940416.
	Award: Restriction and extra duty for 30 days, reduction to AEAA.  No indication of appeal in the record.

941014:	Applicant to unauthorized absence 0730, 941014.

941104:	Applicant from unauthorized absence 2235, 941104 (21 days/apprehended).

941107:	Applicant to unauthorized absence 0700, 941107.

941114:	Applicant from unauthorized absence 0730, 941114 (7 days/surrendered).

941114:	Applicant from unauthorized absence 0730, 941114 (31 day/surrendered).

941118:	Applicant to unauthorized absence 0700, 941118.

941129:	Applicant from unauthorized absence 1100, 941129 (11 days/ apprehended).

941230:	DD Form 214: Applicant discharged under other than honorable in lieu of a trial by court martial, authority:  NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630650.

Applicant’s separation package missing from service record.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 19941230 under other than honorable conditions in lieu of a trial by court-martial (A and B).  In the absence of a discharge package, the Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (C) and, after a thorough review of the available records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, found that the discharge was proper and equitable (D and E).

Issue 1:  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 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 service record is marred by award of nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on two separate occasions and subsequent periods of unauthorized warranting a trial by court martial, 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 Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational opportunities as requested in the issue.  Regulations limit the Board’s review to a determination on the propriety and equity of the discharge.  

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, documentation of community service, and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities, are examples of verifiable documents that should be provided to receive consideration for relief, based on post-service conduct.  The Board commends the Applicant for his dedication to today’s youth through coaching football.  However, at this time, the Applicant has not provided sufficient verifiable documentation of good character and conduct to mitigate his misconduct while on active duty

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 2 Oct 96, Article 3630650, PROCEDURES FOR PROCESSING ENLISTED PERSONNEL FOR SEPARATION IN LIEU OF TRIAL BY COURT‑MARTIAL. 

B.  A punitive bad conduct discharge may be adjudged for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Article [e.g., 86, unauthorized absence for a period more than 30 days] upon conviction by a Special or General Court-Martial, in accordance with the Manual for Courts-Martial].

C.  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.  

D.  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.

E.  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