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

 ex-MSSR, USN
Docket No. ND04-01109

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20040629.  The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable and the reason for the discharge be changed to C.O.G.  The Applicant requests a documentary record 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 personnel appearance hearing in the Washington, D.C. area.  The Applicant did not respond.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20041103.  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 and narrative reason 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 stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

1.  “I am submitting this letter in consideration for a possible upgrade.  To the best of my recollection I will attempt to summarize my interpretation leading to, during, and after my enlistment.

I was a resident of PROMESA drug rehabilitation treatment program up to the date of departure from boot camp in California.  Even then the military accepted my behavior.  They picked up on a test that I was positive for heroin and overlooked it.  With all good intentions I planned to make a career out of the United States Navy.

Today I realize that my enlistment temporarily stopped my drug addition and there began my alcoholism.  I completed my schooling of mess specialist by the skin of my teeth.  I started out very good, at the top of me class, later to be brought up on charges for unauthorized absences.  I manipulated and obtained medical excuses; my alcoholism was well on its way.

I was hanging out in Tijuana, Mexico until all hours getting back to base minutes before roll call.  Then I moved on to the fleet.  I really wanted this Navy thing to work for me, I’m a good cook and moved up while out it sea.  So much so that ship’s Master Chief transferred me to the CPO mess.  Once we got into port, I was UA and put on restriction.  Having anticipated this I accumulated various ID’s and managed to sneak off.  The ship even left me when they went out of port for war games.

Uncle Sam became very tired of this and with the assistance of the Philippine’s local police I was apprehended and returned to base.  Brought to a speedy captains mass again and put on a plane to the United States.  There I was discharged.

At that time I believe that the United State Military accepted alcohol to the extent that military bases had various clubs for officers to enlisted men clubs.  They even had beer-dispensing machines on the base.  At no time was I offered help, counseling or rehabilitation.  I remember speaking to an officer, not stating the direct nature of my problem, but asking for help, to no avail.  This stayed with me and allowed me an easy path to the pain, suffering, addiction and prisons to follow.

Today with the assistance of my higher power and the program of Alcoholics Anonymous I’ve accumulated some years of sobriety This has allowed me to consider myself a productive and useful member of society; one, who is willing and able to give service to others.”

Documentation

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

Copy of DD Form 214
Letter of recommendation from Rev. S_
Letter of recommendation from S_ H_

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	880531 - 880628	COG
	Active:   None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  880629		Date of Discharge:  891122

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    01  04  25 (Does not exclude lost time)
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  34			Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  56

Highest Rate:  MSSA

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  NMF*		Behavior:  NMF		OTA:  NMF

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  None

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  44

*No Marks Found in the service record

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:

890309:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: UA from 0500, 890218 to 1000, 890220.
	Award: Forfeiture of $100 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 14 days.  No indication of appeal in the record.

890629:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86 (2 Specs):  UA from 890517 to 890609; and from 890616 to 890620.
	Award: Restriction and extra duty for 30 days, reduction to E-1.  No indication of appeal in the record.

890710:	Retention Warning from USS TARAWA:  Advised of deficiency (A beginning pattern of misconduct), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning. 

891023:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86 (3 Specs):  UA from 890916 until apprehended on 890921; from 0500, 890922 until apprehended at 0730, 890922; and from 1400, 890922 until apprehended at 1945, 890926.
Violation of UCMJ, Article 121:  Theft of an AFID on 890922.
Award:  Forfeiture of $349 per month for 2 months, restriction for 45 days.  No indication of appeal in the record.

891025:	USS TARAWA notified the Applicant of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct as evidenced by three NJPs and by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense as evidenced by larceny of a government ID card.

891025:	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.

891109:	Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and due to the commission of a serious offense. 

891112:	UA beginning at 0715, 891112.

891115:	CNMPC directed the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.

891118:	Apprehended at 0108 in Olongapo City, RP.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 19891122 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.  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 nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on three occasions for violation of UCMJ, Articles 86 and 121.  His repetitive unauthorized absences established a pattern of misconduct.  No other narrative reason more clearly describes the circumstances surrounding the Applicant’s processing for administrative separation.  While he may feel that his alcohol consumption was a factor that contributed to his actions, the record clearly reflects his disregard for the requirements of military discipline and demonstrated that he was unfit for further service.  The evidence of record does not demonstrate that the Applicant was not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions.  Relief denied.
.  
The Applicant’s discharge characterization accurately reflects his service to his country.  Normally, to permit relief, an inequity or impropriety must have existed during the period of enlistment in question.  No such inequity or impropriety 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.  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, employment record, documentation of community service, certification of non-involvement with civil authorities and credible evidence of a substance free lifestyle, are examples of verifiable documentation that may be provided to receive consideration for relief, based on post-service conduct.  The Applicant’s evidence of post-service conduct was found not to mitigate his misconduct sufficient to warrant an upgrade to his discharge.  Relief not warranted.

The Applicant is reminded that he may petition the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) at 2 Navy Annex, Washington, D.C. 20370-5100 if he desires further review of his service record.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560A, Change 8 effective 21 Aug 89 until 14 Aug 91), Article 3630600, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL 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.

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