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

ex-YN3, USN 
Docket No. ND03-01341

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20030807.  The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions.  The Applicant requests a documentary record review.  The Applicant did not list any representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20040526.  After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the Applicant’s service was discovered by the NDRB.  The Board’s vote was unanimous that the character of the discharge shall not change.  The discharge shall remain: UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-140 (formerly 3630600).

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

1.  “I think I’ve given a lot to the navy and was not just a burden.  I also feel that receiving an other than honorable was a severe form of punishment.  I realize, when in the military they say you have to leave your personal problems at home.  But when it comes to family and the military you just can’t separate the two.  When I transferred to my last duty station VFA-137, in Lemoore, CA I was going through a messy divorce, it affected me in a negative manner and I made several mistakes, mistakes for which I’ve asked on numerous occasions to get help with but instead received punishment and a fine.  Even with all these obstacles I started to turn things around made E5 and got my warfare pin.  After deployment I was late for work, actually several people were late for work but because of previous mistakes I went to CO’s mast.  I realized I should have been punished but not this severe.

2.  Dear Executive Director,

My name is K_ F_ M_ (Applicant), I was discharged from the Navy with an other than honorable my second enlistment.  I feel that the discharge that I received did not portray the person that I am and what the service meant to me.  Straight out of high school I joined the Navy, I wore my uniform proudly with respect.  I’ve learned so much in the Navy with its many traditions and histories.  I’ve always accepted the responsibility for my own actions.  I’ve had many trials and tribulations in my time in the Navy.  When I asked for help it was not of concern or was told things happen.  My only regret in life is that I was only being human.  My only flaw is that rather than being the type of individual that tried to cover up problems, I seeked resolution.  I have nothing negative to say about the Navy.  There is many shipmates that are still asking for help today, but no one is listening because the work is getting done and done correctly and on time.  I was proud to be a Yeoman in the Navy and its was very hard for me to watch the war on television, because I wanted to be there instead of just sitting around.  I tried to join the Army when the war first began, but was told I would have to wait 2 years before I could join because of my other than honorable discharge.  I know in my heart that I am better than the discharge that I received.  I hope in the future our Navy’s senior enlisted will hear the cries and questions of their junior troops before its too late.  Too many of our troops are attempting suicide and getting discharged for drugs because they feel they don’t make a difference and are not heard.  I’ve given 8 years of my life for my country and Navy and have lost a marriage partly due to 3 middle east deployments.  I would die for my country if I had to.  I hope dear Sir or Mam that you would highly consider a change of my discharge to general, so that if one day if the Army needed people for the front line, I would have the choice of knowing I could be one of those people.  Thank you.

Very Respectfully,

K_ F_ M_ (Applicant)”

Documentation

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

Applicant’s DD Form 214
Applicant’s Honorable Discharge Certificate, dated August 1, 1999

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	940121 - 940821	COG
	Active:   USN 			940822 - 990801	HON

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  990802		Date of Discharge:  020913

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    03  01  12
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  23			Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  52

Highest Rate:  YN2

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  3.00 (1)	Behavior:  2.00 (1)		OTA:  3.00

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  NDSM with Bronze Star, AFEM, SSDR (2), Letter of Commendation

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/MISCONDUCT, authority:  NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-142 (formerly 3630605).

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

000914:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Absence without leave.
	Award: Forfeiture of ½ month pay per month for 2 months, extra duty for 45 days, reduction to YNSN.  Reduction suspended for 6 months.  No indication of appeal in the record.

000914:	Retention Warning:  Advised of deficiency (Violation of the UCMJ Article 86, Absence without leave.  CO’s NJP awarded: RIR E3 (suspended for 6 months), forfeiture of $633.37 a month for 2 months (suspended fro 6 months), and 45 days extra duty.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

001214:	Vacate suspended forfeiture of ½ months pay for 2 months.  [Extracted from Commanding Officer’s letter dated 020814.]

010901:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence, violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Disobey a lawful order.
	Award: Forfeiture of $826.90 per month for 1 month, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to YNSN.  Reduction suspended fro 6 months.  No indication of appeal in the record.

020802:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence on 020730, violation of UCMJ, Article 107: False official statement on 020730
	Award: Restriction for 45 days, reduction to YN3.  No indication of appeal in the record.

020806:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and alcohol abuse rehabilitation failure.

020806:	Applicant advised of 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 and to submit a statement.

020814:	Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct, and alcohol abuse rehabilitation failure.  Commanding Officer’s comments (verbatim): A below average performer with little capability for productive service due to his continued pattern of unauthorized absences.  Petty Officer M_ (Applicant) attended Level II alcohol treatment in 1996.  Since reporting to this command he has had numerous difficulties with unauthorized absences, culminated by this latest episode.  In addition to his UA, he violated a lawful order by consuming alcohol in the barracks, which was a major contributing factor in his inability to arrive at work on time.  Petty Officer M_ (Applicant) also has a significant history of fabricating stories to cover his actions, a trait that I cannot tolerate in my Administrative office.  In my opinion, Petty Officer M_ (Applicant) has zero potential for further military service and should be administratively processed with an Other than Honorable Discharge.

020906:	Commander, Cruiser Destroyer Group ONE directed the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 20020913 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (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 equitable and proper (C and D).

Issue 1.   The Applicant contends his disciplinary problems were the result of stress caused by family situation.  The NDRB recognizes that serving in the U.S. Navy is challenging.  Our country is fortunate to have men and women willing to ensure the hardships and sacrifices required in order to serve their country.  It must be noted that most members of the Navy serve honorably and therefore earn their honorable discharges.  In fairness to those members of the Navy, commanders and separation authorities are tasked to ensure that undeserving Sailors receive no higher characterization than is due.  The NDRB found that the Applicant's service was equitably characterized.  Relief  on this basis is denied.

The Applicant contends that he served the United States well and he is entitled to an upgrade.  When the service of a member of U.S. Navy has been honest and faithful, it is appropriate to characterize that service as honorable.  An Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge is warranted when significant negative aspects of a member's conduct or performance of duty outweigh the positive aspects of the member's military record.  The Applicant’s service was marred by three nonjudicial punishment proceedings for violations of the UCMJ, to include violations of Articles 86, 92 and 107.   The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, reflects his willful failure to meet the requirements of his contract with the U.S. Navy and falls far short of that required for an upgrade of his characterization of service.  Relief is not warranted.

Issue 2.  The NDRB has no authority to change reenlistment codes or make recommendations to permit reentry into the naval service or any other of the Armed Forces.  Reenlistment policy of the naval service is promulgated by the Commander, Navy Recruiting Command, 5722 Integrity Drive, Bldg 784, Millington, TN 38054.  Neither a less than fully honorable discharge nor an unfavorable "RE" code is, in itself, a bar to reenlistment.  A request for a waiver is normally done only during the processing of a formal application for enlistment through a recruiter.  

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 documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments or any other evidence related to his discharge 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 31, dated 20 Feb 01, effective 25 Jan 01 until 21 Aug 02, Article 1910-142  [formerly 3630605]. SEPARATION BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT - COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE.

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