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

 ex-AA, USNR 
Docket No. ND03-01076

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20030605.  The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions.  The Applicant requests a documentary record 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 20040423.  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.  Dear Sir or Mamm:

 I’ve been diagnosed with having Bipolar Disease which in fact my doctor says I had before entering the navy.  Although I still wish I was part of the navy, I believe that by having Bipolar Disease that plays a big part in the mishap of which I caused.  Please review and feel free to call my doctor, Dr F_, I most respectively request a change from other than honorable to general discharge.  Thank you.”

Documentation

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

Copy of DD Form 214.

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	None
	Active:   USN			None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  900711		Date of Discharge:  921208

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    02  02  07
	Inactive:  00  02  21

Age at Entry:  18			Years Contracted:  8 (7 months extension)

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  42

Highest Rate:  ABHAN

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  3.36 (5)	Behavior:  3.44 (5)		OTA:  3.44

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  JMUC, NDSM, SASM(wb*), SSDR

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  6

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:

901002:	Ordered to active duty for 24 months under the Airman Apprenticeship program.

920227:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: UA from 0530, 920203 to 2150, 920209 (6 days).
	Award:  Forfeiture of $150.00 pay per month for 2 months ($100.00 pay per month suspended for 6 months), restriction for 10 day, extra duty for 20 days.  No indication of appeal in the record.

920514:	Civil Conviction:  [Long Beach Municipal Traffic Division] for reckless driving.
Sentence:  Ordered to pay $1,084.00 on or before 920914.

920528:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 134: On or about 920512, unlawfully consume alcohol while under the legal drinking age of 21.
	Award:  Forfeiture of $200.00 pay per month for 1 month (suspended for 6 months), restriction and extra duty for 15 days, reduction to E-2 (suspended for 6 months).  No indication of appeal in the record.

921028:	Psychological evaluation indicates Applicant was diagnosed with a personality disorder, not otherwise specified, (mixed borderline and antisocial traits).
 
921113:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 95: On or about 921026, escape from custody, violation of UCMJ Article 134: (3 Specifications), Specification 1: On or about 921026, unlawfully consume alcohol under legal drinking age, Specification 2: On or about 921026, was disorderly in conduct, Specification 3: On or about 921026, jump from the USS PELELIU into the cargo net located below the brow.
	Award:  Forfeiture of $440.00 pay per month for 2 months (suspended for 6 months), restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to E-2.  No indication of appeal in the record.

921116:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of convenience of the government due to a personality disorder, misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense and misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct as evidenced by service record.

921117:	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.

921123:	Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of convenience of the government due to a personality disorder, misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense and misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct as evidenced by service record. 

921130:	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 on 19921208 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:  Normally, to permit relief, an error or injustice must have existed during the period of enlistment in question.  No such error or injustice occurred during the Applicant’s enlistment.  While he may feel that his mental health was a contributing factor, it does not mitigate the Applicant’s disobedience of the orders and directives that regulate good order and discipline in the naval service, demonstrating he was unsuitable for further service.  Additionally, there is no evidence that Applicant was not responsible for his actions.  His service record is marred by award of nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on three separate occasions thus substantiating the misconduct.  Relief denied.

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, 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.   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), 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