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

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

  ex-SA, USN
Docket No. ND05-00825

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20050419.  The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions).  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 20050811.  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/PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-140 (formerly 3630600).

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

“So I can receive some of your benefits.”

Documentation

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

Applicant’s DD Form 214
Employment Reference Letter, dated November 1, 2004
Letter of Acceptance into Western Dakota Technical Institute, dated March 8, 2005
Letter from Applicant, dated April 2005

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	000216 - 000228	COG
	Active:  USA (RA) 		970618 - 990408	GEN (RE-3)

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  000229		Date of Discharge:  030520

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    03  02  22
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  31			Years Contracted:  4 (9 months extension)

Education Level:  12+		AFQT:  32

Highest Rate:  SN

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  NA*			Behavior:  NA*		OTA:  NA*

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  National Defense Service Medal, Good Conduct Award, Sea Service Deployment Ribbon, Army Service Ribbon

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  150

*Not available

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT, authority:  NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-140 (formerly 3630600).

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

000229:	Enlisted USN for 4 years (9 months extension).

001004:	Applicant commenced a period of unauthorized absence at 0730 this date.

001015:	Applicant from unauthorized absence at 0640 (10 days).

001016:	Commanding Officer, USS Bridge (AOE 10), NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86:  Unauthorized absence from 0730-001004 to 0640, 001015 (10 days).
	Award:  Forfeiture of $100.00 pay per month for 2 months (suspended for 6 months), restriction and extra duty for 22 days.  No indication of appeal in the record.

001016:	Retention Warning:  Advised of deficiency (Violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning. 

001228:	Counseling:  Per the Drug and Alcohol evaluation from Commanding Officer, Naval Hospital Bremerton of 001120, Applicant ordered to abstain from the consumption of all alcoholic type beverages until successful completion of the Applicant’s prescribed aftercare program.

021009:	Officer in Charge, Naval Construction Training Center Detachment, Fort Leonard Wood, MO, NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92:  Dereliction of duty.
	Award: Restriction and extra duty for 14 days.  No indication of appeal in the record.

021009:	Retention Warning:  Advised of deficiency (Violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Failure to Obey Order or Regulation (Dereliction in the performance of duties)), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning. 

021106:	Officer in Charge, Naval Construction Training Center Detachment, Fort Leonard Wood, MO, NJP for violation of UCMJ 86:  Unauthorized absence; violation of UCMJ Article 92 (3 specs):  Failure to obey order or regulation; violation of UCMJ, Article 107:  False official statement; violation of UCMJ, Article 134:  Disorderly conduct, drunkeness.
	Award:  Restriction and extra duty for 14 days.  No indication of appeal in the record.

021106:	Applicant commenced a period of unauthorized absence.

030326:	Applicant apprehended from unauthorized absence (140 days).

030408:	Officer in Charge, Naval Construction Training Center Detachment, Fort Leonard Wood, MO, NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 85:  Desertion; violation of UCMJ, Article 134:  Restriction breaking.
	Award:  Forfeiture of $301.00 pay per month for 1 month, restriction and extra duty for 14 days, reduction to E-2.  No indication of appeal in the record.

030408:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and misconduct commission of a serious offense.  Applicant notified that the least favorable characterization of service possible is under other than honorable conditions.

030408:	Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult with qualified counsel elected to waive all rights. 

030411:	Officer in Charge, Naval Construction Training Center Detachment, Fort Leonard Wood, MO, recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct commission of a serious offense and misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.

030418:	Commanding Officer, Naval Construction Training Center, Gulfport, forwarded the Officer in Charge letter of 030411, recommending approval.

030501:	Commander, Naval Reserve Forces Command authorized the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.

The Service Record did not contain a complete Summary of Service.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged in absentia on 20030520 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct (A).  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 (B and C).

Normally, to permit relief, an impropriety or inequity must have existed during the period of enlistment in question.  No such impropriety or inequity is evident during the Applicant’s enlistment.  When the service of a member of the U.S. Navy has been honest and faithful, it is appropriate to characterize that service as honorable.  An under other than honorable conditions discharge 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 repeated unauthorized absences totaling 150 days, dereliction of duty, including intentionally failing academic coursework, orders violations, a false official statement, drunk and disorderly conduct, breaking restriction and desertion.  This misconduct resulted in two Page 13 counseling/retention warnings and four separate nonjudicial punishment proceedings for violations of UCMJ Articles 85, 86, 92, 107, and 134.  The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, reflects his willful failure to meet the requirements of his contract with the U.S. Navy.  Such conduct falls far short of that expected of a member of the U.S. military and does not meet the requirements for an upgrade of his characterization of service.  Relief is not warranted.

The Veterans Administration determines eligibility for post-service benefits not the Naval Discharge Review Board.  There is no requirement or law that grants recharacterization solely on the issue of obtaining Veterans' benefits and this issue does not serve to provide a foundation upon which the Board can grant relief.  Additionally, the Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational opportunities.  Regulations limit the Board’s review to a determination on the propriety and equity of the discharge.  

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 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 could 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 Board received and considered all of the Applicant’s submissions, including his letter of recommendation and acceptance letter to Western Dakota Technical Institute.  After careful consideration, the Board concluded the Applicant’s post-service achievements have been insufficient to mitigate his misconduct while in the Naval service.  Relief denied.

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), re-issued October 2002, effective 22 Aug 2002 until Present, Article 1910-140 (formerly 3630600), SEPARATION BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT - PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT.

B.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part V, Para 502, Propriety.

C.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part V, Para 503, Equity.

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 “http://Boards.law.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:

		Secretary of the Navy Council of Review Boards
		Attn:  Naval Discharge Review Board
		720 Kennon Street SE Rm 309
		Washington Navy Yard DC  20374-5023