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

ex-HR, USN
Docket No. ND01-00215

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 001211, 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 did not list any representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 010615.  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 3 to 2 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.  When I joined the service I was very young and immature and I joined to get away from my home environment.  I came from a broken home, and I found that I could not handle the severe stressful situations of being or deployment or the authority figures.
Now that I am older I would like to get my discharge upgrade to a General Discharge under honorable conditions so I could possibly rejoin the service at a later date.  Thank you,

Documentation

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

None

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Active:   None
	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	940127 - 940611	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  940612		Date of Discharge:  961217

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    02  06  06
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  19			Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  81

Highest Rate:  HN

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  NMF*		Behavior:  NMF*		OTA:  NMF

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  NDSM, SSDR, NUC, AFSM

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  3 

*No marks found in service record.
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:

960619:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence from 0700, 14Jun96 to 0700, 17Jun96 (3 days/surrendered).
	Award: Forfeiture of $500 per month for 1 month, bread and water for 3 days.  No indication of appeal in the record.
961024:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Failed to report to duty on 16Oct96.
	Award: Forfeiture of $437 per month for 2 months, restriction for 60 days, reduction to HA.  Reduction suspended for 60 days.  No indication of appeal in the record.

961024:	Retention Warning from Strike Fighter Squadron 87:  Advised of deficiency (Unauthorized absence.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning. 

961109:	Vacate suspended reduction to HA awarded at CO's NJP dated 24Oct96 due to continued misconduct.

961109:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence from 0730-0945, 25Oct96.
	Award: Forfeiture of $437 per month for 2 months, restriction for 60 days, reduction to HR.  No indication of appeal in the record.

961111:	Strike Fighter Squadron 87 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 all punishments under the UCMJ in your current enlistment.

961111:  	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.

961114:	Commanding officer recommended discharge under Other Than Honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a Pattern of misconduct.  Commanding officer’s comments (verbatim): HR (applicant's) character is below Naval standards due to the nature and frequency of the offenses committed.  He has made it a habit to be late for work.  Several personal counseling sessions have been conducted with HR (applicant), yet he has shown no improvement.  He has indicated a desire to be separated and has not potential in today's Navy.  I strongly recommend separation with an Other Than Honorable characterization of service.

961211:	Commander, Carrier Group TWO directed the applicant's discharge under Other Than Honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a Pattern of misconduct.

970206:	BUPERS advised  that the Separation Authority incorrectly lists SPD code of HKN vice HKA and directed issuance of DD 215 to correct the DD Form 214.  

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 961217 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.  The applicant states he wants to rejoin the service.  The NDRB is under no obligation to upgrade an individual’s discharge for the purpose of rejoining any branch of the military service.  Normally, to permit relief, an error or injustice must have existed during the period of enlistment in question.  No such error or injustice occurred 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, an employment record, documentation of community service, certification of non-involvement with civil authorities and proof of his not using drugs, are examples of verifiable documents that should have been provided to receive consideration for clemency, based on post-service conduct.  The applicant did not provide any of these documents.  He is reminded that he remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of his discharge.  The applicant can provide additional documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments at that time.  Legal representation at a personal appearance hearing is highly recommended but not required.  Relief denied.

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 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