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

 ex-MSSA, USN 
Docket No. ND03-00611

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20030225.  The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable.  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 20040401.  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, 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.  “In 1998 I was discharged for some incidents in my military career.  I would like for the board to review my records and reconsider my discharge.  I would like to note no one around me was never in danger or did I injury myself.  I completed all my training on time and did my job.  I was young and scared when leaving home.  I have been punished for my mistakes.  I need a better life than the one I’m living now.  If you can review my records and see that I was an asset to the Navy I can show you and the military I am still an great asset.  I would like for my discharge to change so I can show how much the military means to me.  Or change my REF-4 to one that will allow me to get back in and serve my country.

B_ G_ (Applicant)
(telephone number deleted)”

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: None
	Active:   None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  961226		Date of Discharge:  980406

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    01  03  11
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  19			Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  43

Highest Rate:  MSSA

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  3.00 (3)	Behavior:  2.33 (3)		OTA:  2.83

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  BER, AFSM, NDSM

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None

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

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

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

970704:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Absent without leave, violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Failure to obey a lawful order or regulation.
	Award: Forfeiture of 1/2 pay for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to MSSR.  Forfeiture and reduction suspended for 6 months.  No indication of appeal in the record.  [Extracted from Commanding Officer’s message dated 980331.]

980316:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86 (2 specs): Absent without leave.
	Award: Forfeiture of $539.55 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days.  No indication of appeal in the record.  [Extracted from Commanding Officer’s message dated 980331.]

980316:	Retention Warning:  No further information found in service record.  [Extracted from Commanding Officer’s message dated 980331.]
	
980324:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92 (2 specs): Failure to obey order or regulation.
	Award: Forfeiture of $200 per month for 1 month, reduction to next inferior pay grade.  No indication of appeal in the record.  [Extracted from Commanding Officer’s message dated 980331.]

980326:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense and misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.  [Extracted from Commanding Officer’s message dated 980331.]

980326:	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.  [Extracted from Commanding Officer’s message dated 980331.]

980331:	Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense and misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.  Commanding Officer’s comments (verbatim): MSSA G_ (Applicant) refuses to adhere to naval standards.  He is unproductive and unresponsive to counseling.  MSSA G_ (Applicant) is a burden to his work center and the command.  Considering the severity and pattern of his misconduct, I recommend he be separated from the Navy with an other than honorable discharge.

980406:	DD Form 214: Applicant discharged under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 19980406 under other than honorable conditions 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.  Concerning a change in reenlistment code, 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.  An unfavorable “RE” code is, in itself, not a bar to reenlistment.  A request for a waiver can be submitted during the processing of a formal application for reenlistment through a recruiter.  Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) can make changes to reenlistment codes.

A characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions is warranted when the member’s conduct constitutes a significant departure from that expected of a Sailor.  The Applicant’s service was marred by award of non-judicial punishment (NJP) on three occasions, adverse counseling entries and performance and conduct markings well below the minimum acceptable levels.  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 would be inappropriate.  Relief denied.

The following is provided for the edification of the applicant.  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 naval service.  The NDRB is authorized, however, to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge to the extent such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review.  Examples of documentation that should be provided to the Board include proof of educational pursuits, verifiable employment records, documentation of community service, and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities.  

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 documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments or any other evidence related to his discharge 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 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