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

 ex-MSSA, USN
Docket No. ND03-01410

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20030825.  The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable.  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 20040608.  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/PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-140 (formerly 3630600).

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

1.  “I made many mistakes before having my family and my sons, it made me realize certain things. I work hard and don't have a career now.  My husband was prior Navy also and is not in the USCG.  I want to know if I can change my discharge to honorable: and if it is at all possible I could ever be in the service again.  I wished that I could have seen things different back then.  I was young and very stupid I know this now and hoping to correct my mistake and since I've grown a bit now.

#6. I believe the record to be in error or unjust for the following reasons:
In Boot Camp and MS “A” School I worked very hard and did my very best and it paid off.  In Boot Camp I was Medical Yeoman and was promoted to E-2 out of Boot Camp.  In “A” School I also was top of my class and was promoted to E-3 and received the IPO when I graduated.  I worked hard and was very dedicated to my work.  Once I was stationed to the Simon Lake in La Madd, Italy I worked hard and was even picked over the MS’s that have been there a while to work in the Ward Room.  For some reason some of the other Petty Officers didn’t like me.  Who cares you can’t get a long with everyone, but I felt these two certain P0’s were against me.  One day I had finished my product and I went to ask some of the other cooks to go get a drink out front with me.  When we got out drinks it was like 5 minutes and we were headed back to finish up and clean our areas.  Well, heading back I was the last one to enter the galley the other cooks were putting food on the line and I was stopped by MS2 L_ our watch captain at the time.  She told me to get back into the Galley and I told her I was headed that way then I swear on my life she shoved me back.  She actually put her hand on my shoulder/chest area and pushed me backwards.  I was shocked and told her not to do it again.  She pushed me again I told her once more to not push me.  One last time she shoved me and I said you know what and I walked away.  I will admit I wanted to hit her I wanted to push her and make her feel stupid like she was making me feel.  But, I went up to the smoke deck and cried a while then I consulted my other friends on the ship on how to handle this matter.  I was told to go to the MA’s to file a report I did and nothing I was told to go back to see my Senior Chief M_.  So I did and there was MS2 L_ crying saying she didn’t do anything.  So I sat down and talked with 4 MS petty officers and my Senior Chief I started crying because no one believed me I felt like I was trapped in this Twilight Zone where no one was listening to me.  I even had witnesses 3 or 4 other MS’s and 2 FSA’s.  They said they wouldn’t believe us over a Petty Officer and that we didn’t like her so we were making this story up.  Why would I do that?  Honestly, like I had nothing better to do then to accuse someone of pushing me.  Come on now I have better things to do with my time, sorry.  Well, a few of the petty officers believed me due to some credit worthy people and all of their stories matched, but the people in that room that day never believed what I had to say or what the witnesses had to say.  I know if I had one person saving one thing and like 3 other people saying another I think i would have believed people for what they were saying instead of going by Rank.  I think MS2 was crying because she knew she was wrong and she would have got in trouble.  I really think they were trying to protect her because she was a “Christian woman” and “she had a family” and “why would she push me she would never hurt anyone.”  She got away with it never apologized and when she saw me in the berthing she smiled at me and I felt confused.  I felt that the Navy had let me down I realized that it was wrong and I hated the Navy and their ways after that day I wanted out and I felt to just get out I would just go UA for a while and they would let me go.  Truthfully I never wanted to leave.  I worked so hard to get ahead I loved what I was doing and I wanted to do my best again, but I felt I was stuck doing and that I messed up so had I could never fix it.  I swear to you she did push me and I can’t believe how they handled it and all I want to do is go back into time and do things different, but I can’t so I went a little stupid and just wanted some one to help me and actually listen, but nothing.  I just wanted to say I loved the Navy in the beginning up until the Simon Lake.  I feel if I would have got stationed some where else I would have been one my way to the top.  I actually know I would have been on the top by now. I just wanted to do my best and help others get there to.  I do feel that I should get my other than honorable changed to something better.  I know I deserve it.  I am sorry I took so much of your time up and I really hope you can help me with this matter.  Please let me know if there is anything else I can do to help with this process.  Thanks. I was also wondering if I would ever be able to maybe try again and do better this time.  I am a very hard worker, dedicated, and I feel I could show you if given the chance again.  Thank you for your time and please contact me with any questions or comments.

Note my name back then way C_ L_ F_ (Applicant), now it is P_ (Applicant).  I am married and I have two young sons I just want to do good for myself and for my family.”

Documentation

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

Letter from Applicant, undated

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	971201 - 971222	COG
	Active:   None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  971223		Date of Discharge:  000830

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    02  08  08
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  21			Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  52

Highest Rate:  MSSN

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  NMF*	Behavior:  NMF		OTA:  NMF

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  NUC (2), NER (3), AFEM, SSDR (4)

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  Unable to determine what is UA or confinement on 
         DD Form 214, Block 29

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT, authority:  NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-140 (formerly 3630600).

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

990210:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Absence from unit on 0730, 981207 to 981215 (8 days), violation of UCMJ, Article 87: Missing movement on 981208.
	Award: Forfeiture of $572 per month for 1 month, restriction for 60 days, reduction to MSSA.  Reduction suspended for 6 months.  No indication of appeal in the record.

990304:	Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (Unauthorized absence when you absented yourself from your unit from 0730, 981207 until 981215 and consequently missed ship’s movement on 981208, as evidenced by Commanding Officer’s nonjudicial punishment on 990210.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning. 

990316:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Failure to go to appointed place of duty on 990302.
	Award: Forfeiture of $50 per month for 1 month.  No indication of appeal in the record.

990518:	NJP.  No further information found in service record.  [Extracted from NAVPERS 1070/604, Awards.]

000428:	Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (Failure to comply with U.S. Navy’s single sponsor/military couple with dependent/s policy in accordance with OPNAVINST 1740.4 and MILPERSMAN 3810190.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning. 

000731:	NJP.  No further information found in service record.  [Extracted from NAVPERS 1070/604, Awards.]

000830:	DD Form 214: Applicant discharged under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct, authority:  NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-140.

Applicant’s discharge package missing from service record.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 20000830 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct (A). In the absence of a discharge package, the Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (B) and, after a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, 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 four occasions.  The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of her service, reflects her 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 to honorable would be inappropriate.  It must be noted that most Sailors serve honorably and well and therefore earn honorable discharges.  In fairness to those Sailors, commanders and separation authorities are tasked to ensure that undeserving Sailors receive no higher characterization than is due.  Relief denied.

Issue 2.  The NDRB has no jurisdiction over reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Navy.  Neither a less than fully honorable discharge nor an unfavorable "RE" code is, in itself, a bar to reenlistment.  A request for a waiver is normally done only during the processing of a formal application for enlistment through a recruiter.  

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 additional documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments or any other evidence relating to her 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 18, effective
12 Dec 1997 until 21 Aug 2002, Article 1910-140 (formerly 3630600), SEPARATION BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT - PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT.

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