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

 ex-SR, USN
Docket No. ND02-00654

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 020411, 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 030116.  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, as submitted

Prior to the documentary discharge review, the applicant introduced no issues as block 8 on the DD Form 293 is blank. 

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):

	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	930303 - 931108	COG
	Active:   None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  931109		Date of Discharge:  950713

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    01  08  05
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  18			Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  73

Highest Rate:  SA

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  NMF		Behavior:  NMF		OTA:  NMF

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  NDSM

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:

940331:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Absent from duty section muster on 2245, 26 Mar 94 - 0237, 27 Mar 94, violation of UCMJ, Article 92 (2 specs): (1) Failed to obey a lawful general regulation on 27 Mar 94, to wit: wrongfully consuming alcoholic beverages while under the age of 21, (2) Failed to obey a lawful general regulation by wrongfully consuming alcoholic beverages while in a duty status on 27 Mar 94.
	Award: Forfeiture of $466 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to SR.  Reduction suspended for 6 months.  No indication of appeal in the record.

940401:	Retention Warning:  Advised of deficiency (On 31 March 1994, you were found guilty at Commanding Officer's nonjudicial punishment for a violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Article 86 absence without leave by remaining absent from place of duty for a period of 3 hours and 52 minutes, Article 92 (2 specs) failing to obey a lawful general regulation by wrongfully consuming alcoholic beverages while under the age of 21 and by wrongfully consuming alcoholic beverages while in a duty status.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning. 

940721:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 91 (2 specs): (1) Disrespectful in language to a PO1 on 13 Jul 94, to wit: by using obscenities as he walked away from the PO1, (2) Willfully disobey a lawful order from a P01 by not picking up cigarette butts, violation of UCMJ, Article 107: Make an official statement with intent to deceive on 13 Jul 94, to wit: "he threw his cigarette butt in the buttkit.
	Award:  Forfeiture of $416 per month for 1 month, correctional custody for 30 days.  No indication of appeal in the record.

940928:	Retention Warning:  Advised of deficiency (Violation UCMJ Article 86: unauthorized absence - fail to go and Article 92: failure to obey.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning. 
	
950403:	Summary Court-Martial.
	Charge I:  violation of the UCMJ, Article 86:
	Specification: Unauthorized absence 0555 - 0745, 3 Mar 95.
	Charge II: violation of the UCMJ, Article 128:
	Specification: Unlawfully strike SA in the back of the head with a closed fist.
	Finding: to Charge I and II and the specifications thereunder, guilty.
	Sentence:  Forfeiture of $570.00, restriction for 60 days.
	CA action 950317:  Sentence approved and ordered executed.

950503:	Service School Command, Great Lakes, IL 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.

950503:	Applicant advised of rights and having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to appear before an Administrative Discharge Board.

950531:	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, that the misconduct warranted separation, and recommended discharge with a general (under honorable conditions).

950620:	Commanding Officer, Service School Command, Great Lakes, IL directed discharge with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.  Commanding Officer’s comments (verbatim): Enclosure (1) summarizes SR (applicant's) misconduct and is further aggravated by his propensity to commit misconduct.  Despite all attempts to motivate him, SR (applicant) exhibits no desire to improve and to become a productive member of this command or the Navy.  SR (applicant) has no potential for further naval service.  Based upon a thorough review of enclosure (1), I concur with the Administrative Board's findings and recommendations.  Pursuant to reference (a), I direct that Personnel Support Activity Detachment, Great Lakes separate SR (applicant) from the naval service with a discharge characterized as General Under Honorable Conditions."

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 950713 with a 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).

Though the applicant introduced no decisional issues for consideration, the Board determined that the discharge was proper and equitable.  The Applicant’s record reflects two NJP’s and one Summary Courts-Martial.  Normally, such a record would warrant an other than honorable discharge, but in this case the Administrative Discharge Board recommended a general (under honorable conditions) discharge.  

The following is provided for the Applicant’s edification.  Normally, to permit relief, an error or inequity must have existed during the period of enlistment in question.  No such error or inequity 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 and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities, are examples of verifiable documents that could have been provided to receive consideration for clemency, based on post-service conduct.  The Applicant did not provide any of these documents.  Relief denied.

The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of discharge.  The Applicant can provide additional documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments at that time.  Representation at a personal appearance hearing is recommended but not required.

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