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

 ex-AR, USN
Docket No. ND02-00203

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 020107, 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 020731.  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, as submitted

1.  July 24, 1988 was going to be my 18th birthday.  I had just graduated from high school and decided that I was going to join the U. S. Navy.  I was proud of myself and my family was proud of me as well.  The night of my 18th birthday I was in boot camp in Orlando, Florida, a little scared and apprehensive, but I was soon going to be a man (or so I thought at the time).  After boot camp I was on my way to Millington, Tennessee to attend school for AD (Aviation Machinists Mate).  When I reported to Millington, to my shock, I was chosen to work mess hall for 30 days.  I thought to myself, "OK, not a big problem.  I can handle it."  Which I did.  The big problem started after I had completed mess hall duty.  The Navy changed the AD curriculum for the next 100 sailors, four classes of 25. 1 was in the first class of 25 of this new curriculum, which 70% of the airmen failed, myself included.  I was sent into the fleet General Billet.  After such a high failure rate the Navy went back to the old curriculum, but my path to Naval success had already taken a turn for the worse.  I was feeling like a worthless failure and wondering when my manhood would begin.  I was assigned to the U. S. S. Lexington AVT-16 in Pensacola, Florida and was assigned to the division of Aviation fuels (ABF).  Now I was scared.  I was in a rate I did not choose, on a ship I did not want to be on, in a town I had not chosen for duty stations.  As I started to get comfortable and my scared feeling went away, I started to get angry with myself for my failures in AD school as well as the Navy for changing the curriculum which landed me here in my current predicament.  Then my 18 year old immature, bull-headed self got the better of me and I started to act out.  I would go U.A. for a day or two and I started to get into trouble by being restricted to the ship.  Entirely my fault, as I know now, but as an 18 year old kid I couldn't see it.  I thought everyone was against me.  Pressure from home, the Navy, and mostly myself was too much to handle.  Soon after I switched Divisions to try for a new start.  I worked with Yellow Gear (tugs, forklifts, cranes, etc.) but my same troubles were right behind me.  At this time I was feeling the failures in full effect.  I thought I was at rock bottom and things couldn't get any worse.  Boy was I wrong.  My LTCD did not like me and to this day I think she was trying to kill me.  She ordered me into one of our spaces right next to the smoke stack they called the sweatbox.  She gave me a foxtail, dustpan, bottle of general purpose cleaner, and some rags and told me not to come out until it was clean.  After I passed out and was found with a case of heat exhaustion, they took the temperature in the sweatbox.  It was 115 degrees during the night shift.  I was switched to days and the next day she gave me 2 - 5 gallon buckets and sent me to another one of our spaces at the very bottom of the ship (09 level) and had me hauling water by hand up 7 levels by climbing ladders.  I couldn't tell you how many trips I made, but it took all day.  The next day she sent me with a bottle of General Purpose cleaner, rag, foxtail, dust pan, gallon of paint, and an acid brush and sent me onto the hangar bay and told me to clean and paint all the pad eyes on the hangar bay.  Total count was over 1800.  The hangar bay was not even our divisions' responsibility.  Just about every hour she came over to me and told me I was not moving fast enough and would tell me to work faster.  I couldn't take it anymore, and lost my temper.  I was filled with rage.  The feeling of worthlessness from the beginning topped off with someone belittling and pushing an overuse of demeaning authority upon you was just to much for a young person who had other ideas of what Navy life would be like to handle.  They sent me back to Captains Mast and back onto restriction.  On October 29, 1989 there was a crash on deck and 5 people were killed.  One of them was my good friend T_ G_.  He was burnt on 95% of his body and lived for about 45 minutes after the crash.  The only way to identify him was by his big yellow gloves.  I stayed by his side every minute before he died and held his hand.  To this day I still have nightmares about that crash and can smell the burning flesh like it was yesterday.  After several minor offenses the captain discharged me with OTH Discharge for pattern of misconduct.

Mams and sirs of the review board I am not trying to make you feel sorry for me.  I made plenty of mistakes in my life but this is one I would like to correct if at all possible.
There isn't a day that goes by that I don't regret how my Naval experience turned out and I am ashamed to talk about my discharge status.  I know I can't take away or change the past, but I can change the course of my future, with your help.  The reasons I would like to have my discharge status changed are to numerous to put on paper, but I would like to mention a few:

1)	I would like some of my pride back.
2)	I would like the honor of saying "Honorable".
3)	The Houston Fire Department.  It has been my life's dream to be HFD, but with my status I can only continue to dream.  You can help make that dream a reality for me.  I have several years experience being a Volunteer Fire Fighter, but would like to make a career with HFD while I am still young enough to join the force.
4)	The chance to re-enlist in case my services is needed to protect our Country and what we stand for.  I would be proud to serve my country in fighting this war on terrorism.

If you are unable to grant me an honorable discharge, I would greatly appreciate it if you would grant me a General under Honorable Condition.  Thank you for your time and consideration and God Bless You.  If you have any questions or need to speak to me, please feel free to contact me at any time at (phone number deleted).

Again, 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)	880112 - 880724	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  880725		Date of Discharge:  901119

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    02  03  25
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  18			Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  43

Highest Rate:  AA

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  3.07 (3)	Behavior:  2.73 (3)		OTA:  3.07

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  CGR (SOS), MUC

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  11

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:

880727:	Applicant briefed on Navy's policy on drug and alcohol abuse.

890718:	Applicant to unauthorized absence from 0630 to 1430, 18Jul89.

890729:	Applicant to unauthorized absence from 0800, 29Jul89.

890731:	Applicant from unauthorized absence 0630, 31Jul89 (1 day/surrendered).

890802:	Applicant to unauthorized absence from 0630 to 1530, 2Aug89.

890808:	Applicant to unauthorized absence from 0630 to 0700, 8Aug89.

890816:	Applicant to unauthorized absence from 0630, 16Aug89.

890817:	Applicant from unauthorized absence at 2333, 17Aug89 (1 day/surrendered).

890822:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86 (6 specs):  Unauthorized absence, violation of UCMJ, Article 92.
	Award:  Correctional custody for 30 days.  No indication of appeal in the record.

891018:	Retention Warning from USS LEXINGTON (AVT-16):  Advised of deficiency (Sleeping during normal working hours, unauthorized absence from morning quarters, and substandard personal grooming standards), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

891113:	Retention Warning from USS LEXINGTON (AVT-16):  Advised of deficiency (Third notice letter of indebtedness, failure to pay just debts), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning. 

900124:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86 (3 specs): (1) Unauthorized absence from 0730, 9Jan90 to 0755, 11Jan90 (2 days/surrendered), (2) Unauthorized absence from 0730 to 0930, 17Jan90, (3) Unauthorized absence from 2030, 17Jan90 to 0330, 18Jan90, violation of UCMJ Article 92 (2 specs): (1) Failure to obey order by wrongfully not attending DC/3M EMI on 15Nov89, (2) Failure to obey a lawful order by wrongfully leaving the ship in civilian clothes while on uniform restriction on 1Dec89, violation of UCMJ, Article 112A: Wrongfully possess eight 800mg Rufen pills prescribed to another.
	Award: Forfeiture of $200 per month for 1 month, restriction and extra duty for 30 days, reduction to AR.  Reduction suspended for 6 months.  No indication of appeal in the record.

900217:	Counseling:  Advised of deficiency (Performance, personal behavior, responsibilities), notified of corrective actions and assistance available.

900222:	Counseling:  Advised of deficiency (Responsibilities), notified of corrective actions and assistance available.

900324:	Counseling:  Advised of deficiency (Performance and personal behavior), notified of corrective actions and assistance available.

900326:	Counseling:  Advised of deficiency (Late for muster), notified of corrective actions and assistance available.

900521:	Summary Court Martial
	Charge I:  violation of the UCMJ, Article 86.
	Specification: Unauthorized absence 1100, 5Apr90 to 0730, 13Apr90 (7 days/surrendered).
	Finding:  to Charge I and the specification thereunder, guilty.
	Sentence:  Forfeiture of $362.00, confinement on bread and water for 3 days, reduced to SR.
	CA action 900525:  Sentence approved and ordered executed.

900530:	Applicant released from confinement having served 3 days of sentence adjudged 21May21.

900604:	USS LEXINGTON (AVT 16) notified applicant of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and misconduct by reason of commission of a serious offense and misconduct by reason of drug abuse.

900614:	Applicant advised of his rights and having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to appear before an Administrative Discharge Board.

900712:	An Administrative Discharge Board, based upon a preponderance of the evidence and by unanimous vote, found that the applicant had committed misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct, misconduct due to commission of a serious offense, and misconduct due to drug abuse, that the misconduct warranted separation, and recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions.

901031:	Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct, misconduct due to a commission of a serious offense, misconduct due to drug abuse.

901113:	CNMPC 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 901119 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.  A characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions is warranted when the member's conduct constitutes a significant departure from that expected of a sailor.  The applicant’s service was marred by award of nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on two occasions, one summary court martial and adverse counseling entries on other occasions.  The Board found that the applicant’s age, education level, and test scores qualified him for enlistment.  While he may feel that his immaturity and dissatisfaction with the Navy were factors that contributed to his actions, the record is devoid of evidence that the applicant was not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions.  The applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, reflects his willful disobedience of the orders and directives which regulate good order and discipline in the naval service, and falls short of that required for an honorable characterization of service.  An upgrade would be inappropriate.  Relief denied.

Concerning a change in reenlistment code, the NDRB has no authority to change reenlistment codes or make recommendations to permit reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Naval Service or any other branch of the Armed Forces.  Neither a less than fully honorable discharge nor an unfavorable “RE” code is, in itself, a bar to reenlistment.  A request for waiver is normally done only during the processing of a formal application for enlistment through a recruiter.  Relief is therefore denied.

The Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment opportunities as requested in the issue.  The applicant’s discharge characterization accurately reflects his service to his country.  The discharge was proper and equitable.  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.  The applicant 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.  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 15560A, Change 8 effective 21 Aug 89 until 14 Aug 91), 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