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

 ex-SR, USN
Docket No. ND01-00815

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 010530, 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 011214.  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 - Pattern of Misconduct, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues verbatim:

1.  I did three years active duty during Sept 88 thru Nov 91 and was in the Gulf War during that time.  I didn't like the Navy it I was told the truth about the Navy I would not have joined.  I was told that the Navy only had 4 yr enlistments and not 2 yrs, but while in the Navy new people would come on ship and had only 2 yr enlistments.  I feel I was mislead by my recruiter.  So I feel that for my time in the service that my discharge should be upgraded to honorable.  I have been out for 10 years and have not been in trouble with the law or any kind of trouble.  I'm a abiding citizen I have a job on the river and would like to better myself.  I would like to go to school that I paid for while I was in the Navy, I would like to be entitled to the benefits but I can't until my discharge is upgraded.  So please consider the upgrade of my discharge.  Thank you for time and cooperation.

Documentation

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

Copy of DD Form 214

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Active:   USN			None
	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	880809 - 880919	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  880920		Date of Discharge:  911101

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    03  01  12
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  18			Years Contracted:  4 

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  27

Highest Rate:  SA

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  3.40 (3)	Behavior:  3.33 (3)		OTA:  3.46

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  SSDR, SASM, NDSM

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  44

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:

890627:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: UA from 0730, 890615 to 2030, 890618 (3days/R), violation of UCMJ Article 87: Missing ship's movement on 890616.
	Award:  Forfeiture of $299.00 per month for 1 month, restriction and extra duty for 15 days.  No indication of appeal in the record.

890912:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: UA 0730, 890819 to 2119, 890824 (5days/S).
	Award:  Correctional Custody for 30 days, forfeiture of $350.00 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 30 days.  No indication of appeal in the record.

900307:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: UA from 0740, 900102 to 900206 (36days/R); violation of UCMJ Article 87: Missing ship's movement on 900125.
	Award:  Correctional Custody for 30 days, forfeiture of $350.00 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 30 days.  No indication of appeal in the record.

910313:	Retention Warning from USS JOHN L. HALL (FFG-32):  Advised of deficiency (Unauthorized absence, missing ships movement), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning. 

910313:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: UA; violation of UCMJ, Article 87: Missing movement.
	Award:  Forfeiture of $377.00 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days.  No indication of appeal in the record.

910815:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: UA.
	Award:  Forfeiture of $376.95 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days.  No indication of appeal in the record.

910816:	USS JOHN L. HALL (FFG-32) 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 punishment under the UCMJ in your current enlistment.

910816:  	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.

910906:	Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.  

910920:	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 911101 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).

The applicant raises no decisional issues in his application.  The Board found no impropriety or inequity in the discharge.  The Other Than Honorable discharge accurately describes the applicant’s service to the U.S. Navy.  While on active duty, the applicant was found guilty at NJP of five separate violations of the UCMJ.  Three of the applicant’s offenses were serious military offenses that could have resulted in a punitive discharge.  Additionally, the record shows the Navy took considerable effort in counseling and advising the applicant on corrective actions and consequences of continued misconduct.  The applicant, however, continued his misconduct and was appropriately separated from the Naval service.  Relief is denied.

The applicant’s issue describes his resentment toward the Navy, post service conduct and requests a change in discharge to secure benefits.  The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the re characterization of a 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 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 failed to provide documentary evidence to demonstrate his positive community service, employment history, and clean police record.  Relief is not warranted.

Regarding the applicant’s request for a change in discharge in order to secure veterans benefits, the NDRB will not change a discharge so that an applicant may secure VA benefits.  The applicant should consult with the appropriate government agencies in order to determine benefit eligibility.  Relief is not warranted.

The applicant remains 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 recommended. 

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 – 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 “afls10.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