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

 ex-STGSA, USN
Docket No. ND02-01264

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 020906, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable.  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 030612.  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, as submitted

1.  Please review my past status of discharge for honorable, in order that my family and I can hopefully obtain a loan to buy our first house.  Any additional documents needed are not available by me, but may be assessable by chain of command.  If you have any additional questions, feel free to write or call on reverse side.  Thank you for your time.

Documentation

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

None

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	880609 - 880831	COG
	Active:   None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  880901		Date of Discharge:  930330

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    04  07  00
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  20			Years Contracted:  4 (24 months extension)

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  46

Highest Rate:  STG3

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  3.48 (5)	Behavior:  3.44 (5)		OTA:  3.52

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  SSDR, NDSM

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/Misconduct – Pattern of misconduct, authority:  NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

911125:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86 (2 specs): (1) Unauthorized absence from 0700-0730, 911029, (2) Unauthorized absence from 0715-0810, 911121.
	Award: Extra duty for 10 days, reduction to STGSN.  Reduction suspended for 6 months.  No indication of appeal in the record.

911211:	Retention Warning from USS GOLSBOROUGH (DDG 20):  Advised of deficiency (Unauthorized absence.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

920224:	Retention Warning from USS GOLDSBOROUGH (DDG 20):  Advised of deficiency (Indebtedness.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

920317:	Vacate suspended reduction to STGSN awarded at CO's NJP dated 911125 due to continued misconduct.

920317:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86 (5 specs): (1) Absence from unit, (2-5) Failure to go to place of duty, violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Dereliction in the performance of duties.
	Award: Forfeiture of $153 per month for 1 month, correctional custody for 30 days.  No indication of appeal in the record.

930301:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 107: False official statement, violation of UCMJ, Article 121: Larceny.
	Award: Forfeiture of $233 per month for 1 month, reduction to STGSA.  No indication of appeal in the record.

930302:	USS GOLDSBOROUGH (DDG 20) notified Applicant of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct as evidenced by seven specifications of unauthorized absence, dereliction in the performance of duties, and larceny; and misconduct due to commission of a serious offense as evidenced by dereliction in the performance of duties and larceny.

930303:	Applicant advised of 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.

930309:	Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.

930315:	BUPERS directed the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 930330 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct (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).

Issue 1:  In the Applicant’s case, the Board could discern no impropriety or inequity and therefore considered the Applicant’s discharge proper and equitable. A characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions is warranted when the service member’s conduct constitutes a significant departure from that expected of a Sailor.  The record is void of any evidence that the Applicant was not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions.  The Applicant’s service record is marred by award of non-judicial punishment (NJP) on three separate occasions, to include the appropriate retention and discharge warnings.  The Applicant’s summary of service clearly reflects his disobedience of the orders and directives that regulate good order and discipline in the naval service, and demonstrated he was unsuitable for further service. An upgrade to honorable conditions would be inappropriate.  Relief denied.  For the Applicant’s edification, Sailors who exhibit a pattern of misconduct normally receive a discharge characterization of under other than honorable conditions. 

Additionally, the Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing home buying opportunities as requested in the issue.  Regulations limit the Board’s review to a determination on the propriety and equity of the discharge.  In the Applicant’s case, the Board could discern no impropriety or inequity and therefore considered the Applicant’s discharge proper and equitable.   Relief denied.  

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 the service.  However, the NDRB is authorized to consider outstanding post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge, 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.  Verifiable proof of any post-service accomplishments must be provided in order for the Applicant to claim post-service conduct and behavior as a reason to upgrade a less than honorable discharge.  Evidence of continuing educational pursuits, a positive employment record, documentation of community service, and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities, are examples of verifiable documents that should be provided to receive consideration for relief, based on post-service conduct.   

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 additional documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments at that time.  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 – A PATTERN 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 “afls14.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