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

   ex-SR, USN 
Docket No. ND03-00107

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 20021023, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions.  The Applicant requested a documentary record discharge review.  The Applicant did not list any representative on the DD Form 293.  In the acknowledgement letter, the Applicant was informed that he was approaching the 15 year point for review by this Board and was encouraged to attend a personal appearance hearing in the Washington D.C. area.  Applicant did not respond.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20030912.  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/Misconduct - Pattern of misconduct, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as submitted

1.  My Undesirable Discharge was inequitable because my unauthorized absence were less than 180 days.  I wish I could go back and change my actions because I still have a great respect for the U.S. Navy!

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)	19870810 – 19870816	COG
	Active:   None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  19870817		Date of Discharge:  19881207

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    01  03  21	Does not exclude lost time
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  18				Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  11 GED			AFQT:  00

Highest Rate:  SN

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

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

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  AFEM

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  27

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:

880219:	Applicant to unauthorized absence 0001, 880219.

880220:	Applicant from unauthorized absence 1340, 880220 (1 day/surrendered).

880302:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence from 2400, 880218 to 1340, 880220 (1 day/surrendered).
	Award: Restriction for 20 days, extra duty for 45 days, reduction to SA.  Restriction for 20 days and extra duty for 25 days suspended for 6 months.  No indication of appeal in the record.

880302:	Retention Warning from USS MOUNT VERNON (LSD 39):  Advised of deficiency (Unauthorized absence.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning. 

880825:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence 0700, 880803 to 1700, 880816 (13 days/surrendered), violation of UCMJ, Article 87: Missing movement on 880804.
	Award: Correctional custody for 30 days.  No indication of appeal in the record.

881014:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence from 0700, 881010 to 0645, 881011 (23 hours, 45 minutes).
	Award: Extra duty for 45 days, reduction to SR.  No indication of appeal in the record.

881016:	Applicant to unauthorized absence 0730, 881016.

881030:	Applicant from unauthorized absence 0039, 881030 (13 days/surrendered).

881104:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Failure to obey a lawful order on 881015.
	Award: Forfeiture of $335 per month for 1 month, restriction and extra duty for 45 days.  No indication of appeal in the record.

881104:	USS MOUNT VERNON (LSD 39) notified Applicant of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.

881107:	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.

881121:	Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.

881128:	CNMPC 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 19881207 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 four separate occasions.  The Applicant was discharged for misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct as evidenced by his four punishments under the UCMJ.  The fact that his unauthorized absence was less than 180 days does not provide a basis under which the Board may grant relief.  The Applicant’s summary of service clearly reflects the Applicant’s 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 would be inappropriate.  Relief denied.

Concerning reenlistment, the NDRB has no authority to change reenlistment codes or make recommendations to permit reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Naval Service or any other branch of the Armed Forces.  Neither a less than fully honorable discharge nor an unfavorable “RE” code is, in itself, a bar to reenlistment.  A request for waiver is normally done during the processing of a formal application for enlistment through a recruiter.  Relief is therefore 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, and certification of community service and non-involvement with civil authorities are examples of verifiable proof that can be submitted.      

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 15560A, effective 870615 - 890110), Article 3630600, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED MEMBERS 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.