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

 ex-BMSR, USN
Docket No. ND99-00435

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 990208, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to entry level separation or uncharacterized.  The applicant requested 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 991206.  After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, NDRB discerned no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the applicant’s service.  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 – commission of a serious offense, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

1.  I feel the discharge I received (other than honorable) and the reason for discharge (misconduct-commission of a serious offense)was inadequate.  I, during the time away form my command that led to the discharge, was complying with the wishes of my mother.  At the time, my brother J_ was a Marine on alert in 29 Palms California, my mother was afraid that he and I would get killed in Desert Shield.  Three years previous, 1997, my brother, J_, died of leukemia.  My mother was terrified that she would loose us toWar.  I made a decision to stay with her to help relieve her fears.  My brother served in Desert Storm for 6 months and returned home safely.

All I'm requesting is that the Military change my discharge to Entry Level Discharge.  The instructions that accompained DD Form 293 indicates that if I was separated on or after 1 October 1982 then an Entry Level Discharge could be given.  I had less than 6 months of active service.

If circumstances were different back then I would still be in.  My family is the most important thing in my life back then and still today, please comply with my request.

Documentation

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

Copy of DD Form 214.

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Active:   None
	Inactive:  USNR (DEP)	900120 - 900318	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  900319		Date of Discharge:  901025

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    00  07  07
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  19			Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  12 1/2		AFQT:  47

Highest Rate:  SR

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  3.00 (1)	Behavior:  2.80 (1)		OTA:  2.80

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  None 

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  46 

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/Misconduct – commission of a serious offense, authority:  NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

900320:	Retention Warning:  Advised of deficiency (Failure to disclose preservice involvement with civil authorities.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning. 

900920:	Psychiatric eval:  Diagnosed:  Axis I: Uncomplicated bereavement -resolved, Axis II: Personality disorder NOS - mixed type with dependent, immature and narcissistic features.

900927:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence from 2400, 6Jul90 to 1600, 22Aug90 (46 days/surrendered).
	Award:  Forfeiture of $362 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days.  No indication of appeal in the record.

901001:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.

901001:  	Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights except the right to obtain copies of the documents used to support the basis for the separation.

901018:	Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.  Commanding officer’s comments (verbatim): SR (applicant's) decision to remain UA for 46 days has clearly demonstrated substandard behavior which is extremely prejudicial to good order and discipline and totally unacceptable.  Transferred to NTC San Diego 6Jul90.  Upon his arrival at Norfolk International Airport he decided he did not want to report on board Conte De Grasse and returned to his California residence.  SR (applicant) turned himself in to military representatives in San Diego on 22Aug90 and was subsequently sent to Comte De Grasse.  SR (applicant) professes an overriding need for maternal support as a result of the 1988 death of his brother from lukemia.  Evaluations by Navy psychologists indicate a mixed type of personality disorder with dependent, immature and narcissistic features.  Although medical opinions state that this disorder renders SR (applicant) incapable of serving adequately in the naval service.  There is no evidence to support the documentation that this disorder interferes with the performance of his duty.  Medical opinion further states that SR (applicant) is competent and fully responsible for his actions.  In light of this, SR (applicant) is being processed for his serious offense of misconduct only.  Per conversations with SR (applicant), he has no desire or motivation to remain in the Navy.  His severe lack of maturity, poor judgement and emotional dependence on his mother merely add credence to my opinion that he has no potential for naval service.  Based on the strength of his desire not to remain in the Navy and the strong potential for future problems with this individual, it is this commanding officer's recommendation that SR (applicant) be separated from the Navy by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense and that the characterization of the discharge be under other than honorable conditions.

901022:	CNMPC directed the applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 901025 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).

The applicant believes that he warrants an Entry Level Discharge because he was on active duty less that 6 months.  The NDRB determined that he was on active duty in excess of 7 months, thereby not qualifying for consideration for a change to his discharge.  Relief denied.   
Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560A), Change 8, effective 
21 Aug 89 until 14 Aug 91, Article 3630600, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL 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 obtain a copy of DoD Directive 1332.28 by writing to:

		DA Military Review Boards Agency
		Management Information and Support Directorate
		Armed Forces Reading Room
		Washington, D.C.  20310-1809

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
		Washington Navy Yard
		720 Kennon Street SE Rm 309
		Washington, DC 20374-5023