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

 ex-AN, USN
Docket No. ND01-00578

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 010327, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable.  The applicant requested a personal appearance hearing before a traveling panel closest to Memphis, TN.  The applicant listed Shelby County Veterans Services as the representative on the DD Form 293.  In the acknowledgement letter to the applicant, he was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) does not travel; all hearings are held in the Washington DC 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 011214.  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: GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

1.  Falsely accused of being 3 1/2 days UA, when I was present at work at my duty station.

2.  Falsely accused of being 8 hrs and 55 minutes UA on 8 Apr 94, when I was only 10 minutes late.

Documentation

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

Statement from applicant dated March 19, 2001
Copy of DD Form 214

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Active:   None
	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	910404 - 910826	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  910827		Date of Discharge:  940520

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    02  08  24
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  18			Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  88

Highest Rate:  AN

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  3.45 (4)	Behavior:  3.40 (4)		OTA:  3.40

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  NDSM

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  11

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

GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/MISCONDUCT, authority:  NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

920218:	Applicant to unauthorized absence from 0730, 18Feb92.

920225:	Applicant from unauthorized absence 0730, 25Feb92 (7 days/surrendered).

920720:	Applicant to unauthorized absence 0730, 20Jul92.

920721:	Applicant from unauthorized absence 0730, 21Jul92 (1 day/surrendered).

940407:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence from 1000, 17Mar94 to 0110, 21Mar94 (3 days/surrendered).
	Award: Restriction for 30 days, reduction to SA.  Punishment suspended for 6 months.  No indication of appeal in the record.

940407:	Retention Warning from Patrol Squadron Twenty-Four:  Advised of deficiency (Unauthorized absence from appointed place of duty.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning. 

940408:	Applicant failed to report at 0700, 8Apr94 to the squadron Physical Readiness Test.  Applicant reported onboard at 1555, 8Apr94 (8 hrs and 55 mins).

940426:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence from 0700-1555, 8Apr94, violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Derelict in the performance of duty on 21Apr94, to wit: failed to maintain berthing space according to the standards of NASJAXINST 1103.1A and failed room inspection.
	Award: Oral reprimand, restriction for 30 days.  Restriction suspended for 6 months.  No indication of appeal in the record.

940426:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge general (under honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct due to minor disciplinary infractions as evidenced by commanding officer's nonjudicial punishment of 26 April 1994.

940428:	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.

Undated:	Commanding officer recommended discharge general (under honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct due to minor disciplinary infractions.

940505:	BUPERS directed the applicant's discharge general (under honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct due to minor disciplinary infractions.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 940520 general (under honorable conditions) due to minor disciplinary infractions (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’s issues 1 and 2 dispute the basis of his NJP’s.  He states in these issues that he was not UA but he provided no documentation to support his issues.  The Board assumed regularity in the conduct of government affairs.  Relief is denied.

The NDRB did note an administrative error in the discharge.  The applicant was discharged for minor disciplinary infractions.  He should have been discharged for commission of a serious offense.  Since the NDRB will not lower the discharge, the reason for discharge shall remain the same.  Relief is denied.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  The 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.

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 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