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

ex-GSEFN, USN
Docket No. ND03-01099

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20030612.  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 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 20040430.  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, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910 - 142 (formerly 3630605).

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

1.  “To whom it may concern:

My name is J___ C. B____, I was discharged from the navy on December 4th, 2000.  The reason that I am requesting a change of my records, is that I feel that I have done a lot of changing since my mistakes made while I was in active service.  I used my shipmates things in a wrongful way.  I now understand my wrongs, and would really like a second chance.  I think about the mistakes I made almost everyday.  So I hope that with me writing this letter, will help you with the decision.  I would like to have a truthful and honest future with a revision to my records.  I hope that I have convinced you to accept or even think about my request, so me and my family can start a new and better life once I receive a new lease on life.  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)	951113 - 951204	COG
	Active:   USN 			None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  951205		Date of Discharge:  001204

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    05  00  00
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  19			Years Contracted:  4 (12 months extension)

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  53

Highest Rate:  GSE3

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  NMA*		Behavior:  NMA		OTA:  NMA

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  NDSM, SSDR, JMU

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None

*No Marks Available for review

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/MISCONDUCT, authority:  NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-142 (formerly 3630605).

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

971001:	Retention Warning:  Advised of deficiency (Violation of UCMJ, Article 92, failure to obey lawful order or regulation), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning. 

980521:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence.
	Award:  Forfeiture of ½ pay for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 30 days, reduction in rate (suspended for 6 months) E-X.  No indication of appeal in the record.

990804:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Dereliction of duty.
	Award:  Issued Page 13.  No indication of appeal in the record.

990804:	Retention Warning:  Advised of deficiency (Violation of UCMJ, Article 92, Dereliction of duty-sleeping on watch while at restricted maneuvering), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning. 

991222:	Retention Warning:  Advised of deficiency (Violation of UCMJ, Article 92: (2 Specifications) Dereliction of duty, violation of UCMJ Article 86: Absent from appointed place of duty, violation of UCMJ Article 108: Willfully damaging military property, violation of UCMJ, Article 134: Obtaining services under false pretenses), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning. 
	
991222:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92: (2 Specifications) Dereliction of duty, violation of UCMJ Article 86: Absent from appointed place of duty, violation of UCMJ Article 108: Willfully damaging military property, violation of UCMJ, Article 134: Obtaining services under false pretenses.
	Award:  Forfeiture of $637.00 pay per month for 2 months, restriction for 30 days, reduction to E-3.  No indication of appeal in the record.

001117:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 121 (2 Specs): Larceny.
	Award:  Forfeiture of $563.00 pay per month for 2 months, restriction for 25 days, reduction to E-2.  No indication of appeal in the record.

001117:	Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to pattern of misconduct and misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense. 

001121:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to pattern of misconduct and misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.

001121:	Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights.

[SEPARATION AUTHORITY NOT CONTAIN IN SERVICE RECORD.]

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 20001204 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.  When a Sailor’s service has been honest and faithful, it is appropriate to characterize that service under honorable conditions.  Characterization of service as other than honorable is warranted when significant negative aspects of a member's conduct or performance of duty outweigh the positive aspects of the member's military record.  The applicant’s service was marred by the award of nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on four occasions for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).  The applicant’s misconduct included unauthorized absence, dereliction of duty, damaging government property, and larceny.  The applicant’s conduct and performance marks, which form the primary basis for determining the character of his service, reflect his misconduct, and fall below that required for an honorable characterization of service.  An upgrade to honorable would be inappropriate.  Relief is therefore denied.

The following is provided for the edification of the applicant.  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 naval service.  The NDRB is authorized, however, to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge to the extent such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review.  Examples of documentation that should be provided to the Board include proof of educational pursuits, verifiable employment records, documentation of community service, and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities.  

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 30, dated 7 Nov 00, effective 30 Aug 00 until 24 Jan 01, Article 1910-142  [formerly 3630605]. SEPARATION 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