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

 ex-SA, USN
Docket No. ND00-00867
Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 000705, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable.  The applicant requested a personal appearance in the Washington National Capital Region.  The applicant listed a civilian counsel as the representative on the DD Form 293.  In the acknowledgement letter to the applicant, the applicant was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 010719.  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 – Pattern of misconduct, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues (verbatim)

1.  There has been no alcohol related incidences in my past, neither before or after this one offense in the military.

2.  Proof of maturity has been determined by work history, ethics and attentativeness.

3.  Federal reinlistment into an military is prohibited with this discharge.  I would like to be able to serve on reserve duty as an incentive to my law enforcement capabilities.

4.  I have submitted my application, and passed the test for a Federal Law Enforcement position, and would prefer my military status to be in upstanding condition, instead of poor condition.

5.  As a young adult, I made a very detrimental mistake by using alcoholic beverages, especially while I was on a military installation.  I furthered those problems by not obeying the order of owning a vehicle on base.  I was very immature, and feel great remorse for these incidents.  I strongly apologize for the immaturity and stupidity that commited toward the U.S. Navy, and would strongly like the "second chance" to serve on reserve duty.  Please consider the remorse that I have, and consider the upgrade of discharge to honorable.  I assure you that if given a second chance to serve (active or reserve) I won't make those same mistakes a second time.

Documentation

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

Copy of applicant's resume
Copy of certificate for environmental assurance program dated April 1996
Copy of certificate of achievement dated May 2001
Copy of certificate of completion of 9 hours of Licensed Managed Feeding Operation Swine Waste Management Education
Letter of recommendation from Member of Congress dated April 20, 2000
Letter of recommendation from Oklahoma State Senate dated November 18, 1999

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Active:   None
	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	870425 - 871130	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  871201		Date of Discharge:  890411

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    01  04  11
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  22			Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  14			AFQT:  84

Highest Rate:  SN

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  NMF		Behavior:  NMF		OTA:  NMF

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  None

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  97

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/Misconduct - Pattern of misconduct, authority:  NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.  Discharge in absentia.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

880226:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 111: Operating a vehicle while drunk on 0228, 6Feb88.
	Award: Forfeiture of $200 per month for 2 months, reduction to SA.  Reduction suspended for 6 months.  No indication of appeal in the record.

880226:	Retention Warning from Naval Submarine School, Groton, CT:  Advised of deficiency (Drunken or reckless driving, BAC .125 and .133.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning. 
	
881025:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Failure to obey lawful order issued by CO NAVSUBASE New London on 7 and 8 September 1988.
	Award: Correctional custody for 30 days, reduction to SA.  No indication of appeal in the record.

881206:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Absent from appointed place of duty on 0630-0740, 28Nov88, to wit: morning muster.
	Award: Reduction to SR.  Reduction suspended for 6 months.  No indication of appeal in the record.

881212:	Naval Submarine School, Groton, CT notified applicant of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense and misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.

881212:	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.

881215:	Applicant to unauthorized absence 0800, 15Dec88.

881216:	Applicant from unauthorized absence 0704, 16Dec88.

890103:	Applicant to unauthorized absence 0700, 3Jan89.

890111:	Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense and misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.

890202:	Applicant declared a deserter.

890215:	CNMPC directed the applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.  Discharge in absentia authorized.

890327:	CNMPC directed the applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.  Discharge in absentia authorized.

890410:	Applicant returned to military control 0800, 10Apr89 (97 days/surrendered).

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT 
REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 890411, in absentia, under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct (A and B).  The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (C).  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 (D and E).

In response to applicant’s issues 1, 3, and 5, the Board found that the applicant's age, education level, and test scores qualified him for enlistment.  While he may feel that his immaturity was a factor that contributed to his actions, the record clearly reflects his willful disregard for the requirements of military discipline and demonstrated that he was unfit for further service.  The record is devoid of evidence that the applicant was not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions.
Nor has the applicant submitted any proof that he has not been involved in any alcohol related incidents since his discharge (police records check).  Concerning reserve duty in the Armed Forces, the Board has no authority to change re-enlistment codes or make recommendations to permit re-entry into the Naval Service or any other of the Armed Forces.  Neither a less than fully honorable discharge nor an unfavorable "RE" code is, in itself, a bar to re-enlistment.  A request for waiver is normally done only during the processing of a formal application for enlistment.  The Board will not grant relief on the basis of these issues.

In response to applicant’s issues 2 and 4, outstanding post-service conduct, to the extent that such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review, can be considered.  In determining whether a case merits a change based on post-service conduct, the NDRB considers the length of time since discharge, the applicant's record of community service, employment, conduct, educational achievements, and family relationships.  In reviewing the applicant’s post service, the Board was impressed with the efforts he has begun to make in attempting to recoup his reputation which has been sullied by his misconduct in the Navy.  However, the applicant's efforts need to be more encompassing than those provided.  The applicant should have produced evidence of continuing educational pursuits, documentation of community service and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities in order for consideration for clemency based on post-service conduct.  At this time the applicant has not provided sufficient documentation of good character and conduct.  Therefore no relief will be granted.  He is encouraged to continue with his pursuits and is reminded that he is eligible for a personal appearance hearing provided the application is received prior to 11 April, 2004. 

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560A, Change 6 effective 11 Jan 89  until 24 May 89), Article 3630600, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT – A PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT. 

B.  Under the Manual for Courts-Martial, a punitive discharge is authorized for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Article [e.g., 86, for unauthorized absence for a period in excess of 30 days] if adjudged at a Special or General Court-Martial.

C.  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.  

D.  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.

E.  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 “afls10.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