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

ex-SA, USN
Docket No. ND03-01397

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20030820.  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 20040526.  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.  “There were not enough incidents to warrant my bad discharge, aswauth [as such warrants an upgrade to honorable].”

2.  “This was my first and only NJP, aswauth.”

3.  “My record showed I was generally a good service member, aswauth.”

4.  “The punishment I got at discharge was too harsh - it was much worse than most people got for the same offense, aswauth.”

Documentation

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

Letter from Applicant, undated
Job/character reference, dated April 12, 2002
Job/character reference, dated April 8, 2002
Character reference, undated
Letter from Department of the Navy, dated February 26, 2003
Letter from Naval Reserve Recruiting, dated December 20, 2002
Telephone list
Letter from United States Senate, dated March 24, 2003
Letter to Applicant from United States Senate, dated July 2, 2003
Letter to United States Senator, dated June 26, 2003
Letter to Applicant from United States Senate, dated April 11, 2003
Letter to Applicant from United States Senate, dated March 28, 2003
Letter to Applicant from United States Senate, dated July 25, 2003
Letter to United States Senator, dated July 18, 2003
Applicant’s DD Form 214 (Member 1 and 4)

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive:  USNR(DEP)		990702 - 990928	COG
	Active:    None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  990929		Date of Discharge:  000810

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    00  10  12
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  24			Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  10 GED		AFQT:  69

Highest Rate:  SN

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  NMA*	Behavior:  NMA		OTA:  NMA

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  None

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  33**

 *No marks found.
**Unauthorized absence extracted from Block 29, DD Form 214.

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:

000508:	Psychiatric evaluation: Diagnostic Assessment: Axis I: Adjustment disorder with depressed mood, Axis II: Personality disorder not otherwise specified with antisocial, schizoid, and narcissistic traits, Axis III: No diagnosis//Please see medical record.  Axis IV: Problems with primary support group; routine military stressors, Axis V: 51-60 moderate symptoms.  Recommendations:  Highly recommend expeditiously administrative separation.

000810:	DD Form 214: Applicant discharged under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-142.

Applicant’s discharge package missing from service record.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 20000810 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (A).  In the absence of a discharge package, the Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (B), and, after a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, found that the discharge was proper and equitable (C and D).

Issues 1, 2, 3, and 4:  The Applicant states his discharge was based on one isolated incident in 10 months.  Despite a servicemember’s prior record of service, certain serious offenses, even though isolated, warrant separation from the naval service in order to maintain proper order and discipline.  While he may feel that his youth and immaturity were contributing factors, they do not mitigate the Applicant’s disobedience of the orders and directives that regulate good order and discipline in the naval service, demonstrating he was unsuitable for further service.  The Applicant’s service record is marred by award of nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for 33 days of unauthorized absence, thus substantiating the misconduct for which he was separated.  Separation under these conditions generally results in characterization of service under other than honorable conditions.  The evidence of record does not demonstrate that the Applicant was treated more harshly than other and that he was not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions.  The Board could discern no impropriety or inequity and therefore considered his discharge proper and equitable.  Relief denied.

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.  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. 

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.  At this time, the Applicant has not provided sufficient verifiable documentation of good character and conduct to mitigate his misconduct while on active duty.   

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 28, effective 
30 Mar 00 until 29 Aug 00, 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