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

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

ex-SMSN, USN
Docket No. ND06-00736

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20060509.  The Applicant requests the Discharge 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 designate a representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20070216.  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 by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.

PART I - ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Decisional Issues

EQUITY – Good sailor for three years of service.
EQUITY – Post-service.

Documentation

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

Applicant’s DD Form 214 (Service 2)
Certificate of Completion of Intelligence Photography Course, dated February 14, 1992
Letter of Commendation, dated February 5, 1993
Meritorious Captain’s Mast certificate, dated April 10, 1992
Letter of Appreciation, dated November 24, 1991
Endorsement of a Letter of Appreciation, dated December 2, 1991
Letter of Appreciation, dated November 13, 1990
Four pages from Applicant’s service record

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive: USMCR (DEP)* 
		USNR (DEP)	19900914 - 19900919	COG
	Active:    None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  19900920		Date of Discharge:  19940208

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    03  04  19  (Does not exclude lost time)
	Inactive:  None

Time Lost During This Period (days):

	Unauthorized absence:  42 days
	Confinement:		  None

Age at Entry:  19

Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  12				AFQT:  42

Highest Rate:  SMSN

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  3.5 (3)		Behavior:  3.7 (3)		OTA:  3.80

Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, (as listed on the DD Form 214):  National Defense Service Medal; Letter of Commendation, CO, Cruiser Destroyer Grp 5; Southwest Asia Service Medal w/2 Bronze Stars; Sea Service Deployment Ribbon; Joint Meritorious Unit Award; Battle “E”; Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal

*Dates of service and type of discharge not found in record.

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/MISCONDUCT, authority:  MILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events: 

920921:	Applicant to unauthorized absence at 0530.

921005:	Applicant from unauthorized absence at 0700.

921016:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Absence from unit, place or organization.  Violation of UCMJ, Article 87: Missing movement.
	Award:  Forfeiture of $200.00 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 30 days, reduction to E-2.  Reduction suspended for 6 months.  No indication of appeal in the record.

931130:	Applicant to unauthorized absence at 0630.

931228:	Applicant from unauthorized absence at 2235.

940107:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86 (3 specs):  Total 30 days absence.
Violation of UCMJ, Article 87: Missing movement.  Award:  Forfeiture of $466.00 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to E-2.  No indication of appeal in the record.

940108:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with the least favorable characterization of service as under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.  [Extracted from Commanding Officer’s message dated 940112.]

940108:	Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult with counsel, elected to waive all rights.  [Extracted from Commanding Officer’s message dated 940112.]

940112:	Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.

940124:	BUPERS directed the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.

Service Record contains a partial Administrative Discharge package.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 19940208 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).  

The Applicant implies that his discharge is inequitable because he was a “good Sailor” for three years.  When the service of a member of the U.S. Navy has been honest and faithful, it is appropriate to characterize that service as honorable.  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 two nonjudicial punishment proceedings for violations of Articles 86 and 87 of the UCMJ.  The Applicant’s violations of Article 87, missing movement, are serious offenses.  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 Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational opportunities.  Relief is not warranted.

The Applicant implies that his discharge should be changed due to his post-service accomplishments.  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 any post-service documentation to consider mitigating the misconduct that resulted in the characterization of discharge.  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.  The Applicant can provide documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments or any additional evidence related to this 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), Change 5, effective 
05 Mar 93 until 21 Jul 94, Article 3630600, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL 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 87, missing movement.

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 Instruction 1332.28, you may submit a complaint in accordance with Enclosure (5) of that Instruction.  You should read Enclosure (5) of the Instruction 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 Instruction 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