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

 ex-AA, USN
Docket No. ND01-00818

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

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

1.  I Served 3 yrs in the U.S. Navy, and was discharged with a general under honorable conditions.  Through the VA services I was informed that after 6 months it is customary for this type of discharge to be upgraded to honorable.

Documentation

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

Copies of DD Form 214 (2)

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Active:   USN 		None
	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  931122		Date of Discharge:  961121

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    03  00  00
	Inactive:  00  01  00

Age at Entry:  18			Years Contracted:  8

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  43

Highest Rate:  AN

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  3.90 (2)	Behavior:  3.40 (2)		OTA:  3.70

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  MUC, NDSM, SSDR, AEFM

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None

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

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

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

931122:	Ordered to active duty for 36 months under the Airman Apprenticeship program.

950628:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: UA from unit from 1700, 950621 until 0225, 950622.
	Award:  Forfeiture of $300.00 pay per month for 1 months (forfeiture f $300.00 pay per month for 1 month suspended for 6 months), extra duty for 20 days.  No indication of appeal in the record.

950630:	Retention Warning:  Advised of deficiency (Violation of the UCMJ, Article 86, unauthorized absence from 0700, 950621 until 0225, 950622), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning. 

961106:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: UA from 0700, 960909 until 0820, 960910, violation of UCMJ Article 91: (2 Specs), Willful disobedience of a petty officer on 960919 and 960815, violation of UCMJ Article 128: Assault upon a person in the execution of law enforcement duties on 960922, violation of UCMJ Article 134: Drunk and disorderly on 960922.
	Award:  Forfeiture of $490.00 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to E-2.  No indication of appeal in the record.

961107:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of commission of a serious offense as evidenced by your violation of the UCMJ, Article 91, will disobedience of a second class petty officer on 960919, Article 91, willful disobedience of a first class petty officer on 960805; misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct as evidenced by your two or more punishments under the UCMJ in violation of an administrative counseling/warning page 13 with your current enlistment.

961118:  	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 

961119:	Commanding officer recommended discharge general under honorable conditions by reason of commission of a serious offense as evidenced by your violation of the UCMJ, Article 91, will disobedience of a second class petty officer on 960919, Article 91, willful disobedience of a first class petty officer on 960805; misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct as evidenced by your two or more punishments under the UCMJ in violation of an administrative counseling/warning page 13 with your current enlistment.  

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 961121 general under 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’s issue states:  “I Served 3 yrs in the U.S. Navy, and was discharged with a general under honorable conditions.  Through the VA services I was informed that after 6 months it is customary for this type of discharge to be upgraded to honorable.”  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.  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.    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 is denied.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C, Change 14, effective 03 Oct 96 until 11 Dec 97), 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