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

 
 ex-OSSN, USN
Docket No. ND04-01313

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20040819.  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 20041222.  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 1910-144 (formerly 3630610).

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 isolated incident in 15 months of service with no other adverse action.  I am currently trying to use my GI Bill to better my life.  However, because of the one mistake I made I can’t go to college.  I desperately need for my discharge to be upgraded to honorable; so I may pursue my educational goals.”

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)	960627 - 970616	COG
	Active:   None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  970617		Date of Discharge:  990415

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    01  09  28
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  18			Years Contracted:  4 

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  70

Highest Rate:  OSSN

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  3.00 (1)	Behavior:  1.00 (1)		OTA:  2.17

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  AFEM, SSDR

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  1

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/MISCONDUCT, authority: MILPERSMAN, Article 1910-144 (formerly 3630610).

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

980612:	To UA 0700.

980613:	From UA 2115.
 
990309:	Civil Conviction:  [Circuit Court for the Twentieth Judicial Circuit St. Clair County, Illinois] for one count of aggravated battery.  
Sentence:  Two years probations, 77 days served and $6362.45 in restitution and court costs.

990331:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to civil conviction.

990331:	Applicant advised of his rights and having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights.

990401:	Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to civil conviction.  Commanding Officer’s comments: [Applicant] pleaded no contest to one count of aggravated battery on 990309… Based on his commission of a violent misconduct which resulted in great bodily harm to his stepfather, I recommend administrative separation…

990413:	COMPHIBGRU3 directed the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to civil conviction.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 19990415 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to civil conviction (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.  The Applicant states his discharge was based on one isolated incident in “15 months.” Despite a servicemember’s prior record of service, certain serious offenses, even though isolated, warrant separation from the naval service in order to maintain proper order and discipline.  The Applicant violated Article 86 of the UCMJ for an  unauthorized absence and he was convicted in civil court for one count of aggravated battery, thus substantiating the misconduct for which he was separated.  Additionally, the Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational opportunities.  Regulations limit the Board’s review to a determination on the propriety and equity of the discharge.  In the Applicant’s case, the Board could discern no impropriety or inequity and therefore consider his discharge proper and equitable.  Relief denied.

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.  Representation at a personal appearance hearing is recommended but not required.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  The Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 21, effective 01 Sep 98 until 15 Sep 99, Article 1910-144 (previously 3630610), Separation by Reason of Misconduct - Civilian Conviction.

B.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part II, AUTHORITY/POLICY FOR DEPARTMENTAL DISCHARGE REVIEW.

C.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part V, Para 502, Propriety.

D.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part V, Para 503, Equity.

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 “http://Boards.law.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:

		Secretary of the Navy Council of Review Boards
		Attn:  Naval Discharge Review Board
		720 Kennon Street SE Rm 309
		Washington Navy Yard DC  20374-5023