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

ex-MSSN, USNR 
Docket No. ND03-00549

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20030214.  The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to entry level separation or uncharacterized.  The Applicant requests 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 20040114.  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: GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910 - 142 (formerly 3630605).

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

1.  “DUE TO A COMMUNICATION BREAK DOWN BETWEEN USS JOHN F KENNEDY (CV-67) BEACH DETACHMENT AND THE MEDICAL DEPARATMENT OF NAS JACKSONVILLE I WAS ONCE ACCUSED OF DESERTION.  SAID MATTER WAS CLEARED WITHOUT ANY DISCIPLINE TO ME (SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER DELETED) R_ F_ G_ (Applicant).  I WAS ALLOWED TO CONTINUE ON WITH MY NAVAL CAREER UNTIL THE INCIDENT OR FAILURE TO FOLLOW A LAWFUL ORDER OF REPORTING TO BARRACKS 585, AN ORDER WHICH CAME FOLLOWING MY GREETING A MEMBER OF THE FIREARMS DIVISION.  AT THE TIME OF GREETING THIS MEMBER, I HAD NO KNOWLEDGE THAT HE WAS ON RESTRICTION.  I BELIEVE IN THE GREATNESS OF GOD AND THAT I DULY DID NOT DESERVE TO HAVE MY SERVICE TO MY COUNTRY END IN SUCH A MANNER.  IF IT WERE IN GOD’S WILL, I PRAY TO HAVE BOTH MY RE-ENTRY CODE AND DISCHARGE STATUS UPGRADED TO A FULL HONORABLE DISCHARGE.  IT IS MY DESIRE TO RE-ENTER THE ARMED FORCES OF THIS GREAT COUNTRY AND SERVE WITH HONOR, COURAGE AND COMMITMENT.”

Documentation

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

Privacy act authorization form, undated
Letter to Board of Corrections, dated June 15, 2001
Character reference, dated November 2, 2001
Letter to Board of Corrections from Applicant’s father, dated June 25, 2001
Character reference, dated October 1, 2001
Letter to Board of Corrections, dated June 26, 2001
Character reference, dated October 20 2002
Character reference from Applicant’s uncle, dated June 1, 2001
Character reference, dated October 9, 2001
Character reference, dated October 14, 2001
Character reference from a shipmate, undated
Applicant’s DD Form 214 (Member 1 and 4)
Ten pages from Applicant’s service record

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	940831 - 950626	ELS
	Active:   None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  950706		Date of Discharge:  980430

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    02  09  21
	Inactive:  00  00  03

Age at Entry:  20			Years Contracted:  8

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  35

Highest Rate:  MSSN

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  NMF*			Behavior:  NMF		OTA:  NMF

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  NDSM

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  4

*No Marks Found in the service record

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

GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/MISCONDUCT, authority:  NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-142 (formerly 3630605).

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

950710:	Applicant ordered to active duty.

970429:	Applicant missed ship’s movement.

980218:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence from 980116 to 980120 (4 days), violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Fail to obey lawful order on 980116, to wit: failing to report to Barracks 585 as ordered.
	Award: Forfeiture of $100 per month for 1 month, correctional custody for 30 days.  No indication of appeal in the record.

980320:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under honorable conditions (general) by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.  Applicant refused to sign.

Undated:	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. 

980328:	Commanding Officer directed discharge under honorable conditions (general) 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 19980430 under honorable conditions (general) 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).

Issue 1.  A characterization of service of under honorable conditions (general) is warranted when significant negative aspects of a member's conduct or performance of duty outweigh the positive aspects of the member's military record.  The Applicant’s service was marred by award of nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on one occasion and missing ship’s movement on another occasion.  The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, reflects his disobedience of the orders and directives which regulate good order and discipline in the naval service, and falls short of that required for an honorable characterization of service.  An upgrade to honorable is inappropriate.  Relief denied.

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 only during the processing of a formal application for enlistment through a recruiter.  

The Applicant’s discharge characterization accurately reflects his service to his country.  Normally, to permit relief, an error or inequity must have existed during the period of enlistment in question.  No such error or inequity is evident during the Applicant’s enlistment.  Additionally, 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.  Relief not warranted.

The Applicant is reminded that he remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received at the NDRB within 15 years from the date of his discharge.  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 18, effective 
12 Dec 97 until 29 March 2000, Article 1910-142  [formerly 3630605]. SEPARATION 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 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