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

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

    ex-HM2, USN
Docket No. ND05-01045

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20050606.  The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions) and the Narrative Reason for Separation be changed to “Reinstatement.”  The Applicant requests a personal appearance hearing discharge review before a traveling panel closest to Tampa, FL.  The Applicant did not designate a representative on the DD Form 293.  In the acknowledgement letter, the Applicant was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) does not travel; all hearings are held in the Washington, D.C. Metropolitan area.  The NDRB also advised that the Board first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20051027.  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 and reason for discharge shall not change.  The discharge shall remain Under Other Than Honorable Conditions by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the attached document/letter: 

“To Whom It May Concern:

My name is Mr. P_ M. C_ Sr. (Applicant) [social security number deleted]; I was discharged from the U. S. NAVY in March 2004. I served 15.5 years as a Sailor, Hospital Corpsman, and then a Surgical Technologist/Instructor.  Before I joined the armed forces, I was on a path of destruction. I was a high school dropout, searching for a more “Lucrative” career of home burglary.  Then I met the most beautiful young lady who totally helped change my life, she gave me an ultimatum, “either give up this lifestyle or me!” I love (d) this young lady so much I chose her instead.  Mrs. C_ has been by my side for 18 years she is my rock!  It was at her urging that I set goals for myself, and she made me believe that I could find success in any endeavor.  Mrs. C_ was the reason I completed all necessary requirements for the GED exam.  My wife knew that I had potential and I was intelligent from the start.  Upon receipt of my GED, I contacted recruiters from the Army, NAVY, Air Force and Marines.  As far back as I can recall the military uniform has been a fixture in my household. My father (deceased) served in the U.S. Army. Mr. C_ fought in such great battles as Normandy, and the battle of the bulge. Four siblings 2 sisters 2 brothers and 2 brothers in law preceded my tenure in the armed forces.  What drove my decision was the punctuality and responsiveness of the recruiter in his attempt to enlist my manpower into the ranks world’s most powerful NAVY.  Upon completion of basic training in Great Lakes, Ill.  In January 1989, the stage was set for my inclusion into yet another storied and historical cross section within the NAVY, The Hospital Corps.  My love for science along with a passionate desire to assist people in need. I chose to become a Hospital Corpsman. Being in student status meant watch standing obligations, I once overheard single students complain about their duty, I explained to them I rode my bicycle in from home to assume the 0000—0200 watch, after hearing that there were no more complaints. It was clear at that time leadership potential was present.  
While in HM “A” school, an opportunity to attend an advanced school presented itself, operating room technician NEC 8483. I was among the first to raise my hand for this school, all I could remember was the amazing emergency stories my sister would tell me, because she was an Army medic who scrubbed in the O.R.  Upon graduating from O.R. Technician school I accepted orders to the National Naval Medical Center also in Bethesda, Md. While there my knowledge base rapidly expanded. At Bethesda I learned the intricacies of the O.R. for example how to react during code blues, power outages, and other standard operating procedures. Additionally I learned aspects of all types of surgical procedures; ranging from Orthopedics, Urology, OB-GYN, General surgery, Plastic and Vascular surgery. During this time I won my first naval award, Blue Jacket of the month, and again my wife was there for support.  Bethesda was an awesome experience, 1991 saw the beginning of the first Gulf war, and at that time also saw the birth of our first child, that was the happiest day of my life. I was also on several lists to be deployed to the war. God was gracious in that I was not deployed in that effort. However, another opportunity presented itself for me to represent the NAVY and my country. I was placed on a team sent to Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to assist the Naval Hospital with a sudden influx of Haitian migrants fleeing a country that was devastated by civil war and greed.  Guantanamo was an enriching experience; it afforded me a chance to scrub with Army and Naval surgeons. We completed several hundred procedures in a three month period, the cases ranged from minor skin lesions to invasive surgery such as radical hysterectomies, (removal of the female reproductive organs, attributed to Cancer.) The Haitians were grateful for even the smallest medical efforts extended to them.  Upon returning to my home base, we were up for PCS orders in 1992 the three of us transferred to the island of Sicily. With this move also came a promotion to Petty Officer 3rd class and again Mrs. C_ was there. I was pleased to learn the hospital was not ready to receive patients, therefore, I was to become a plank owner of the most technologically advanced medical facility in the Mediterranean. Naval hospital Sigonella touted the capability of having it’s own chemical, biological, and radiological decontamination area in addition to 3-foot steel blast doors in the event of a targeted attack. Prior to completion expecting parents were medically evacuated to other hospital’s through out the European theater to give birth to their infants. This however, changed with the opening of our labor and delivery unit capable of C-Sections and difficult deliveries.  In 1995 we received orders to Newport, Rhode Island this duty station was a challenge because the operating rooms were non functional however, in place was a partner ship with the Newport hospital. This was a great experience, but, it was eclipsed by a more significant event. On February 23rd 1996 at 6:30 pm my wife gave birth to our beautiful daughter this too was one of the happiest moments in our lives. This birth was unique because the whole family was involved in the birth process. Newport saw the appointment of a co-worker and I as the command fitness coordinators for New England with the exception of Connecticut. We had complete autonomy in assisting staff members who struggled with the physical readiness test. One of our tasks was to revamp the remedial conditioning program, this latitude allowed us to tailor a program to address a person’s specific need. The program was so successful we assisted one petty officer in achieving the rank of E—7, who then went on to receive a commission in the Nurse Corps. The Commanding Officers. Capt. C. H_ III (ret.) and Adm. J. P. V_ (ret.) thanked us personally for our efforts at an open meritorious mast.  The next duty station proved most rewarding from the standpoint of assisting humanity on a higher level. In 1998 I volunteered for sea duty as a member of fleet surgical team 7 stationed on Okinawa, Japan. These teams were formerly known as Mobile Medical Augmentation Teams or (MMART).  While a member of this team we embarked on the United States Ships Belleau-Wood (LHA-3), and Essex (LHD-2) these were the only two forward deployed Helicopter carriers in the U.S. Fleet. These two ships would make military headlines by conducting the largest hull swap in naval history. The USS Essex would be home ported in Sasebo, Japan, the USS Belleau-Woods previous homeport. The ship would put course for Okinawa, Japan to on-load the 3lst Marine Expeditionary Unit, this always meant FST-7 would be activated to augment the ship’s medical department.
This would be my first and only sea duty tour, during that three year stint, I became the first member to obtain both Enlisted Surface Warfare and Enlisted Aviation Warfare Specialists pins within the 1st 18 months of deployments. Additionally, I pursued off duty education by registering and completing classes via the web, in preparation of attaining an undergraduate degree.  My performance never faltered even after I was appointed the team’s supply and leading petty officer of the O.R. while underway. The sterilizing equipment onboard the USS Essex were estimated at a value of 2.5 Million dollars, this new responsibility brought with it a new level of accountability, in the form of preventive maintenance on the blowers, motors, fans and other equipment to ensure the medical department area ran smoothly and efficiently.  In those three years I visited places most people read about, these destinations included; Australia, Bahrain, East Timor, Guam, Hong Kong, mainland Japan, Korea, Mt. Surabachi Iwo Jima, the Philippines, Thailand, Saudia Arabia, and Singapore.  In 2002 our destination was the Naval School Health Science (NSHS) San Diego, to fill a billet for instructor duty. This is where my dream of donning khakis with bars or anchors was to happen. Again I took the lead by requesting to become the OPTAR manager for the surgical technologist program, the budget was only $58,000 per fiscal year however. The knowledge I attained by working with the command comptroller was immeasurable, it was this person who fueled my decision in becoming an officer in the medical service corps (MSC). I enrolled in Southern Illinois Carbondale’s Healthcare management program to satisfy requirements to apply for a commission.  I continued to set the bar high for my peers, I acquired the master training specialist qualification within my 1st year at the command. 2002 also saw my promotion to E-6, and my wife was there for support. Command involvement included; command fitness leader, command financial specialist, CPR instructor, special emphasis committee, and the petty officer’s association. I volunteered for myriad civilian projects as well which included; meals on wheels, Boys & Girls club, the Saturday scholars program, Interviewer for a local high school academic decathlon, Super Bowl XXXV, and the red cross during the Cedar fires of October 2003 (San Diego County).
Throughout my 15.5 year career I was a great follower, never had problems with superiors or subordinates.  The methods employed by the command to persecute me were an in house investigation for charges of sexual harassment/fraternization. Upon findings of the investigation I was notified of my impending non-judicial punishment date. At the Captain’s mast I was reduced in rank to E-5, and awarded forfeiture of half month’s pay times two months and transferred to another facility. The prosecuting officer told the members of the administration separation review board that I wrote a letter to congress stating that the command was making me a fall guy, my lawyer and I both felt the board based their decision solely on the letter to congress to discontinue my service. Upon hearing of my situation both my Mother and Sister notified congress of their own volition. My congressman then asked me to describe what happened in my own words.
I sought legal counsel from a staff judge advocate general officer, and he noticed conflicts within the investigation and statements from the witnesses. I asked the counselor if the board would take into consideration my impeccable service record and non-history of disciplinary problems, and would this afford me a good chance at being retained? The both of us were wrong. I was mislead into believing that an other than honorable discharge is not bad. This is not the case; it is very difficult to secure employment suitable for today’s living standards.  I feel the discharge was unwarranted for the simple fact my sustained superior performance was not taken into consideration. Furthermore, the reporting guidelines did not follow protocol as outlined by the OPNAVINST. 5354.1E no one complained of being uncomfortable about the conversations, nor was senior leadership notified until 24 hours later.  The effects of the discharge have been devastating, I have lost 20 pounds from stress, hair loss, major depression, lack of interest in hobbies, and marital strain, just to name a few. It has indeed been difficult to find adequate employment suitable for survival, each time I hear of fellow sailors/friends being promoted to Chief petty officer or receiving a commission, it hits hard because I know I should be there with them.  With all the resources NAVY medicine has, why not send me to resolution training or proper treatment? Instead I was tossed out like garbage, 15.5 years of faithful, dedicated, honest, courageous service and corporate knowledge arrested. I loved the NAVY, I looked forward to serving my country for 10 or more years. During my board hearing I begged and pleaded with the members to retain my services, I volunteered to be shipped to downtown Baghdad, Iraq.  The expectation I hope for is an upgrade to my discharge in order to seek employment that will allow my family and I to live above the poverty line, there were three innocent people affected by the administrative board’s decision that day. I hope to bring closure to this whole situation by clearing my name and record, as I have conveyed the victims and the board I apologize if I hurt anyone.   To the members of yet another board who holds my civilian quality of life in their hands, I say to you, please! Upgrade the discharge status of this ex-sailor and lifelong patriot, who stood countless watches, and scrubbed hundreds of late surgical cases, and who was proud to say that I am a “Hospital Corpsman.”

Submitted with my humblest sincerity, Thank you.

[signed]
Mr. P. M. C_ Sr. (Applicant)”

Documentation

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

Letter from Applicant to Board Members, dtd May 27, 2005, unsigned
Evaluation Reports (6 pgs)
Enlisted Performance Evaluation Reports (12 pgs)
Character Reference Letter from C_ B. P_, dtd February 16, 2004, unsigned
Character Reference Letter from D_ M. S_, Capt(sel), NC, USN, dtd January 2, 2004, unsigned
Letter of Recommendation from A_ H_, CDR MC, USNR, AD, dtd April 21, 2003
Letter of Reference from C_ M. C_, MD, Capt, MC, USN (Retired), dtd April 17, 2003
Letter of Recommendation from C_ H_, III, Capt, MSC, USN (Retired), dtd April 25, 2003 
Letter of Commendation, dtd April 12, 1991
Letter of Recommendation from L_ A. W_, Capt, MC, USN, dtd April 24, 2003 (2 pgs)
Character Witness Statement from SKCM(SW/AW) S_ S. W_, dtd January 7, 2004, unsigned
Character Witness Statement from DT1 A_ M_, dtd January 14, 2004 (2 pgs)
Character Witness Statement from HM1 M_ A_, dtd October 24, 2003 (2 pgs)
Character Witness Statement from HM1 C_ D. D_, dtd October 24, 2003 (2 pgs)
Email from HMC K_P_, dtd January 13, 2004
Character Reference Letter from HMC K_ P_, dtd January 13, 2004, unsigned
Character Witness Statement from HMC K_ P _, dtd November 18, 2003 (2 pgs)
Character Witness Statement from HMC T_ W. N_, dtd January 13, 2004 (2 pgs)
Letter of Appreciation for Academic Decathlon Volunteer, dtd February 13, 2003
Letter from Boys & Girl Clubs of East County, dtd November 14, 2002
Letter of Appreciation, dtd February 18, 2003
NATO Medal Certificate for operations from November 1992-December 1994
Letter of Appreciation from G. E. A_, Commanding Officer, Navy Recruiting District New England, dtd April 8, 1997
Letter of Appreciation from Commanding Officer, USS BELLEAU (LHA-3), dtd March 15, 2000
Letter of Appreciation from Commanding Officer, US NAVAL HOSPITAL SIGONELLA, dtd September 22, 1994
Letter of Appreciation from E.C. H_, Commanding Officer, dtd December 30, 1994
Meritorious Mast Certificate, dtd November 4, 1996
Certificate of Outstanding Performance, dtd May 28, 1996
Certificate of Outstanding Performance, dtd November 4, 1996
Meritorious Mast Certificate, dtd May 28, 1996
Certificate of Completion (Second Class Petty Officer Leadership Course), dtd January 17, 1997
Certificate of Outstanding Performance, dtd July 15, 1997
Certificate of Completion (Enlisted Surface Warfare Specialist), dtd November 4, 2000
Certificate of Completion (Enlisted Aviation Warfare Specialist), dtd March 25, 2001
Master Training Specialist Certificate of Designation, dtd March 7, 2003
Navy and Marine Corps Achievement Medal Certificate, dtd December 17, 2001
American Academy of Medical Administrators Student Admittance Certificate, dtd December 12, 2002
Certificate of Completion (Basic Instructor Training Course A-012-0077), dtd March 27, 2002

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	19881109 – 19890117		COG
	Active:   USN 			19890118 – 19921102		HON
Active:   USN 			19921103 – 19980830		HON
Active:   USN 			19980831 – 20020829		HON

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  20020830		Date of Discharge:  20040301

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    01  07  00  
	Inactive:  None

Time Lost During This Period (days):

	Unauthorized absence:  none
	Confinement:		  none

Age at Entry:  35

Years Contracted:  5

Education Level:  11 [GED]				AFQT:  48

Highest Rate:  HM1

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  3.3 (3) 	Behavior:  2.3 (2) 		OTA:  2.86

Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, (as listed on the DD Form 214):  National Defense Service Medal (2), Navy Good Conduct Medal (4), Flag Letter of Commendation, Meritorious Unit Commendation (2), Navy Pistol Marksman Ribbon, Navy Rifle Marksman Ribbon, Navy Overseas Service Ribbon (4), NATO Medal, Armed Forces Service Medal, Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal, Navy Sea Service Deployment Ribbon, Navy & Marine Corps Achievement Medal, Enlisted Surface Warfare Specialist Breast Insignia, Enlisted Aviation Warfare Specialist Breast Insignia

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

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

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events: 

020830:	Reenlisted this date for a term of 5 years.

030905:	Command Investigation into allegations of Applicant’s misconduct completed.  Investigating Officer recommended Applicant for nonjudicial punishment.

031002:	NJP for violations of UCMJ Article 92.
Specification 1:  Violate SECNAVINST 5300.26C, Paragraph 8(a)(1) on divers occasions on or about May 2003, by committing sexual harassment by creating an intimidating, hostile or offensive working environment in the Naval School of Health Sciences, San Diego, by wrongfully: on divers occasions, making sexually offensive comments to HN J_ H_, thus causing HN H_ to perceive the work environment as being hostile or offensive and, that, a reasonable person would have perceived the same environment as being hostile or offensive.
Specification 2:  Violate SECNAVINST 5300.26C, Paragraph 8(a)(1) on divers occasions from May 2003 through August 2003, by committing sexual harassment by creating an intimidating, hostile or offensive working environment in the Naval School of Health Sciences, San Diego, by wrongfully: on divers occasions, making sexually offensive comments to HM3 C_S_, thus causing HM3 S_ to perceive the work environment as being hostile or offensive and, that, a reasonable person would have perceived the same environment as being hostile or offensive.
Specification 3:  Violate SECNAVINST 5300.26C, Paragraph 8(a)(1) on divers occasions from July 2003 through August 2003, by committing sexual harassment by creating an intimidating, hostile or offensive working environment in the Naval School of Health Sciences, San Diego, by wrongfully: on divers occasions, making sexually offensive comments to HM3 M_R_, thus causing HM3 R_ to perceive the work environment as being hostile or offensive and, that, a reasonable person would have perceived the same environment as being hostile or offensive.
Specification 4:  Violate SECNAVINST 5300.26C, Paragraph 8(a)(1) on divers occasions from July 2003 through August 2003, by committing sexual harassment by creating an intimidating, hostile or offensive working environment in the Naval School of Health Sciences, San Diego, by wrongfully: on divers occasions, making sexually offensive comments to HN E_ W_, thus causing HN W_ to perceive the work environment as being hostile or offensive and, that, a reasonable person would have perceived the same environment as being hostile or offensive.
Specification 5:  Violate NSHS San Diego Instruction 53701.H, dated 29 May 2003, an order which it was his duty to obey, by wrongfully fraternizing with his student, HM3 C_S_, on divers occasions from 29 May 2003 through August 2003.
Specification 6:  Violate NSHS San Diego Instruction 53701.H, dated 29 May 2003, an order which it was his duty to obey, by wrongfully fraternizing with his student, HM3 M_ R_, on divers occasions from July 2003 through August 2003.
Specification 7:  Violate NSHS San Diego Instruction 53701.H, dated 29 May 2003, an order which it was his duty to obey, by wrongfully fraternizing with his student, HN E_ W_ on divers occasions from July 2003 through August 2003.
Violations of UCMJ, Article 134.
Specification 1:  On or about May 2003, committing indecent assault upon HN J_ H_, a person not his wife by forcibly grabbing her buttocks, with intent to gratify his sexual desires.
Specification 2:  On or about 18 July 2003, orally communicating to HN E_ W_ certain indecent language, to wit:  “It must be the ass that got me like that.”  
Specification 3:  On or about 3 July 2003, orally communicating to HM3 C_ S_ certain indecent language, to wit:  I don’t cum very fast, it takes me a long time to cum.  You know I was messing with one girl before and she came before I did, so I need somebody to help me.”  
Specification 4:  On or about 18 August 2003, wrongfully soliciting HN E_ W_ to commit adultery and prostitution.
Award:  Forfeiture of $1142 per month for 2 months, reduction to E-5.  Appealed 031007.  Appeal denied 031103.

031008:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with the least favorable characterization of service as under other than honorable conditions by reason of commission of a serious offense-misconduct.

031008:	Applicant advised of rights and having consulted with counsel, elected to appear before an Administrative Discharge Board.

040114:	An Administrative Discharge Board, based upon a preponderance of the evidence and by unanimous vote, found that the Applicant had committed misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense, that such misconduct warranted separation, and recommended discharge with an other than honorable.

040205:	Commanding Officer, Naval School of Health Sciences, San Diego recommended the Applicant’s under other than honorable conditions discharge by reason of misconduct commission of a serious offense.  Commanding Officer’s comments:  “I concur with the board’s findings, and recommend separation with a characterization of Other Than Honorable.”

040218:	Commander, Navy Region Southwest, directed the Applicant's under other than honorable conditions discharge by reason of misconduct commission of serious military or civilian offense.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 20040301 by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (A and B) with a service characterization of under other than honorable conditions.  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).  

An under other than honorable conditions discharge 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 nonjudicial punishment proceedings for violations of Articles 92 and 134 of the UCMJ.  At NJP, the Applicant was found to have committed four specifications of violations of Article 92 for disobeying SECNAVINST 5300.26C, three specification of violations of Article 92 for disobeying  NSHS San Diego Instruction 53701.H  and four specifications of violations of Article 134 for indecent assault, indecent language and solicitation of prostitution and adultery.  The Applicant appealed his NJP on 20031007 and his appeal was denied on 20031103.  In denying the Applicant’s appeal, Commander, Navy Region Southwest, indicated he found the punishment neither unjust nor disproportionate to the Applicant’s offenses.  The Applicant’s violations of Article 92 and Article 134 (for indecent assault and solicitation) are considered serious offenses.  The Applicant was the subject of a command investigation which further documents the Applicant’s misconduct.  Once notified of his Commanding Officer’s recommendation to administratively separate the Applicant, the Applicant elected to appear before an administrative separation board.  The board found, unanimously, that the Applicant committed the misconduct for which he was processed and recommended the Applicant’s discharge under other than honorable conditions.  The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, reflects his willful failure to meet the requirements of his contract with the U.S. Navy and falls far short of that required for an upgrade of his characterization of service.  Additionally, the Applicant’s record of service clearly documents that misconduct due to commission of a serious offense was the reason the Applicant was discharged.  No other narrative reason for separation could more clearly describe why the Applicant was discharged.  Relief is not warranted.

The Applicant states, “The prosecuting officer told the members of the administration separation review board that I wrote a letter to congress stating that the command was making me a fall guy, my lawyer and I both felt the board based their decision solely on the letter to congress to discontinue my service.”  The Applicant also contends that the Applicant’s administrative board did not consider the Applicant’s prior honorable service.  Despite a servicemember’s prior record of service, certain serious offenses warrant separation from the naval service in order to maintain proper order and discipline.  The Board could find no indication in the evidence of record nor in the documentation provided by the Applicant that the Applicant’s administrative board acted improperly or inequitably.  The Board did note that the Applicant’s counsel did not submit a letter of deficiency regarding the administrative board.  The NDRB found the Applicant’s issue without merit.  Relief on this basis is denied.

The Applicant contends that his discharge was improper because “the reporting guidelines did not follow protocol as outlined by the OPNAVINST 5354.1E.”  The Board could find no evidence in the record or in the documentation provided by the Applicant that the Applicant’s misconduct was improperly reported or that his subsequent nonjudicial punishment proceedings or administrative separation were in violation of OPNAVISNT 5354.1E or any other order or directive.   At the Applicant’s NJP and administrative separation hearing, the Applicant was found to have committed multiple serious offenses.  The administrative separation board and the Applicant’s Commanding Officer recommended that the Applicant be separated by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.  Relief on this basis is not warranted.

The following is provided for the edification of the Applicant.  Normally, to permit relief, a procedural impropriety or inequity must have occurred during the discharge process for the period of enlistment in question.  The Board discovered no impropriety after a review of Applicant’s case.  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 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.  As of this time, the Applicant has not provided sufficient post-service documentation for the Board to consider.  Additionally, the Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational opportunities.  Relief denied.

Regarding the Applicant’s request for reinstatement, the NDRB has no jurisdiction over reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Navy, Marine Corps, or any other of the Armed Forces.  Reenlistment policy of the naval service is promulgated by the Commander, Navy Recruiting Command, 5722 Integrity Drive, Bldg 784, Millington, TN 38054.  

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.  Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), re-issued October 2002, effective 22 Aug 02 until 25 April 2005, Article 1910-142 [formerly 3630605], SEPARATION BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT - COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE.

B.  The Manual for Courts-Martial authorizes the award of a punitive discharge if adjudged as part of the sentence upon conviction by a special or general court-martial for violation of the UCMJ, Article 92, failure to obey an order/regulation or Article 134, indecent assault.

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