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

 ex-SR, USN
Docket No. ND99-00413

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 990129, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions.  The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review.  The applicant listed D___  G____ of the Georgia Dept. of Veterans Service as his representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 000121.  After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, NDRB discerned no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the applicant’s service.  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 3630600.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

1.	Trouble resulted from financial problems not of my own making.  The problems developed due to an overpayment.  My efforts to resolve the problem went to no avail.

2.	Failure of my chain of command to respond appropriately.  I presented a check for payment which was not forwarded.  

3.	I was unable to report for court appearances due to overseas assignments.  This created additional financial and legal problems for me.  

4.	I was told that I would be given an administrative discharge – general under honorable conditions.  This did not happen.
Documentation

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

Copy of DD Form 214
Personal Statement by Applicant
Letter from USS KEARSARGE (LHD 3) dated 26 Aug 1996
Letter from Commander, Amphibious Group Two dated 9 Aug 1996
Letter from N___ S____ dated 26 Aug 1996
High School diploma
Certificate of Completion from USAF Junior ROTC program
Seaman Apprentice Training Course Certificate dated 20 July 1995
Certificate of Achievement from Candace Enterprises, Inc. dated 19 September 1997
Advanced Career Training certificate dated 17 March 1999
Letter of Reference from M___ H____ dated 30 August 1999
Verification of employment letter from Mr. G___ 
Certificate of Baptism [applicant’s] dated 25 Jan 1998

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Active:   USN 			None
	Inactive:  USNR (DEP)	950328 - 950417	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  950418		Date of Discharge:  960910

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    01  04  23
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  19			Years Contracted:  4 

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  34

Highest Rate:  SN

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  NMF 		Behavior:  NMF		OTA:  NMF

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  NDSM, Battle “E”, NUCM, NATO Medal 

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None 

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

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

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

951212:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86:  unauthorized absence on or about 1 Dec 1995, violation of UCMJ Article 91:  disrespect towards a petty officer on or about 1 Dec 1995.
	Award:  Forfeiture of $478 per month for 2 months, correctional custody for 30 days, reduction to E-2.  No indication of appeal in the record.

951212:	Counseling:  Advised of deficiency (unauthorized absence), notified of corrective actions and assistance available.

960418:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86:  Unauthorized absence
Award:  Restriction and extra duty for 60 days, reduction to E-1 (suspended for six months).  No indication of appeal in the record.

960423:	Retention Warning (extracted from CO’s letter dated 12 Aug 96

960723:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 91:  disrespect towards a Chief Petty Officer; violation of UCMJ Article 92:  disobey a lawful general order.
	Award:  Not Available.

960625:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86(16 specs):  Unauthorized absence.
Award:  Restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to E-1.  No indication of appeal in the record.

960730:	USS KEARSARGE notified applicant of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct as evidenced by CO’s NJPs on 951212, 960418, 960625, and 960723.

960731:  	Applicant advised of his 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.

960812:	Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.

960910:	BUPERS directed the applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 960910 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).

Regarding the applicant’s first three issues, the Board found nothing in the records nor did the applicant submit any supporting documentation that showed that his personal and financial problems were of sufficient magnitude that they could not be resolved through standard military channels or by the applicant’s chain of command.  Relief denied.

After reviewing the applicant’s entire service record, the Board determined that the characterization of the discharge as Other Than Honorable was proper and equitable.  The applicant was provided with all appropriate due process in the separation process, including the notification that his discharge would be characterized as Other Than Honorable.  

The following is provided for the applicant’s edification.  The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge (E).  The applicant must be aware that 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 the civilian life subsequent to leaving the service.  Normally, to permit relief, an error or injustice must have been found to have existed during the period of enlistment in question.  Outstanding post-service conduct, 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, may be considered by the NDRB.  The applicant is reminded that he is eligible for a personal appearance hearing provided the application is received within 15 years from the date of discharge.  Representation at personal appearance hearing is highly recommended.

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 – 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 obtain a copy of DoD Directive 1332.28 by writing to:

		DA Military Review Boards Agency
		Management Information and Support Directorate
		Armed Forces Reading Room
		Washington, D.C.  20310-1809

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
		Washington Navy Yard
		720 Kennon St SE Rm 309
		Washington, D.C.  20374-5023