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

 ex-PRAN, USN
Docket No. ND99-01249

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 990927, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable.  The applicant requested 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 000803.  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/Misconduct – commission of a serious offense, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

1.  If more evidence is needed to verify that there was a need for me to be home in 1992, please do not hesitate to call or get in touch with me.  There is 1843 pages from the hospitals involved , several (42) letters that have been notorized of character references, letters from clergy, doctors, co-workers and family.  In every case, they are saying that there was a need for me to be home at the time that my father suffered his heart attack.  There should have been a heartship discharge given to me back in '92.  It is a wrong that I am trying to make right.

Documentation

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

Copy of DD Form 214
Letter from applicant outlining event leading to discharge (3pgs).
Medical related documents (14pgs) 

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Active:   USN			840614 - 890426	HON
	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	830616 - 840613	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  890427		Date of Discharge:  920817

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    03  03  21
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  18			Years Contracted:  6 

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  40

Highest Rate:  PR3

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  3.56 (6)	Behavior:  3.33 (6)		OTA:  3.56

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  BATTLE"E"RIBBON, .38 CAL Pistol Sharpshooter, NUC, ASM, SSDRw2*, NDSM 

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None 

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/Misconduct – commission of a serious offense, authority:  NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

890427:	Reenlisted at AIMD CUBI PT for 6 years.

901229:	Retention Warning:  Advised of deficiency (Private indebtedness - Letters of indebtedness - Failure to make payments), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning. 

920619:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Failure to obey lawful order, violation of UCMJ Article 123: (12 Specs), Uttering worthless checks, violation of UCMJ Article 134: Debt, dishonorably failing to pay.
	Award:  Forfeiture of $521.70 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to E-3.  No indication of appeal in the record.

920623:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.

920624:  	Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights.

920625:	Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.

920801:	BUPERS directed the applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 920817 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (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).

The applicant’s issue states:  “If more evidence is needed to verify that there was a need for me to be home in 1992, please do not hesitate to call or get in touch with me.  There is 1843 pages from the hospitals involved , several (42) letters that have been notarized of character references, letters from clergy, doctors, co-workers and family.  In every case, they are saying that there was a need for me to be home at the time that my father suffered his heart attack.  There should have been a hardship discharge given to me back in '92.  It is a wrong that I am trying to make right.”  While the NDRB sympathetically empathizes with the applicant’s family situation,  it did not find a direct correlation between his misconduct and the existing medical condition.  Specifically, the applicant was discharged for violations of the UCMJ including an Orders Violation, Uttering Worthless Checks, and Dishonorably Failing to Pay Debt.  Additionally, there is no evidence in the record suggesting the applicant applied for a humanitarian discharge, transfer or permissive Temporary Duty while his father was in the hospital.  Relief is not warranted.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), effective 15 Aug 91 until 
04 Mar 93, Article 3630600, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL 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