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

ex-ETSN, USN 
Docket No. ND03-01440

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20030903.  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 20040617.  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 3630600.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

1.  “To Whom It May Concern:

My discharge was both fair and deserved. I went U/A for 49 days of my own free will.  This was the biggest mistake of my life. I will have to live with this mistake for the rest of my life.  I spent 4 years and 7 months in the Navy before this incident and had not got into trouble of any kind in this period.  I have not been in trouble of any kind after this incident either.  I feel that this isolated mistake should not hamper the rest of my life.  I appreciate your consideration of these documents.

Thanks

J_ L_ F_ Jr (Applicant)”

Documentation

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

Applicant’s DD Form 214

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive:  USNR (DEP)	891020 - 900805	COG
	Active:    None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  900806		Date of Discharge:  950711

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    04  11  06	Does not exclude lost time
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  18			Years Contracted:  4 (24 months extension)

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  86

Highest Rate:  ET3

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  3.72 (5)	Behavior:  3.60 (5)		OTA:  3.84

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  NDSM, GCM

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  49

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/MISCONDUCT, authority:  NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

900807:	You are being retained in the Naval service, despite your defective enlistment and induction due to fraudulent entry into naval service as evidenced by your failure to disclose your pre-service civil involvement: Shoplifting, dropped 4/68, no insurance 9/89 paid $15.00, no inspection sticker 1/90, written warning.  However, any further deficiencies in performance or conduct may result in processing for administrative separation.

950412:	Applicant declared a deserter.

950602:	Applicant received onboard USS AMERICA (CV 66).

950612:	Summary Court-Martial.
	Charge I: violation of the UCMJ, Article 86:
	Specification: Unauthorized absence from 0630, 950313 to 0800, 950501.
	Charge II: violation of the UCMJ, Article 87:
	Specification: Missing ship’s movement on 950323.
	Finding: to Charge I and II and the specification thereunder, guilty.
	Sentence: Forfeiture of $756.00, confinement for 30 days, reduced to ETSN.
	CA action 950614: Sentence approved and ordered executed.

950612:	Applicant to confinement.

950706:	Applicant from confinement.

950615:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense as evidence by absent without leave (30 days or more).

950615:	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 950620.]

950620:	Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to absent without leave (30 days or more).

950711:	BUPERS directed the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 19950711 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to absent without leave (30 days or more) (A).  The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (B).  After a thorough review of the available 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.  The Applicant states his discharge was based on one isolated incident with no other infractions.  A characterization of service of other than honorable 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 a Summary Court-Martial for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), to include articles 86 and 87.   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.  It must be noted that most Sailors serve honorably and well and therefore earn honorable discharges.   In fairness to those Sailors, commanders and separation authorities are tasked to ensure that undeserving Sailors receive no higher characterization than is due.  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 additional documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments or any other evidence relating 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 9, effective 
22 Jul 94 until 02 Oct 96, Article 3630600, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL BY REASON 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