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

 ex-AKAA, USN
Docket No. ND02-01122

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 020729, 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 030619.  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)/COMPLETION OF REQUIRED ACTIVE SERVICE, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-104.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as submitted

1.  Dear Sirs:

The reason for the delay in petitioning you to review my discharge is that I have only recently received my DD214, after many attempts to have it forwarded to me.  It was not given to or signed by me upon my discharge, two years ago.

I had always been under the impression that I had an honorable discharge with a RE Code of one.  It was with great concern and bewilderment when I saw that I had been given a general under honorable conditions and a RE4 Code.

I believe my discharge was unjust for I have served my country for four years with pride and honor.  I received a Sea Service Deployment Ribbon with Bronze Star, Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal with Bronze Star, Armed Forces Service Medal, NATO Medal and a Meritorious Unit Commendation.  For the duration of my last cruise, my First Class Petty Officer, (AKI R_ B_) appointed me as night shift supervisor, for material control (Aviation Stores).

I can only believe my discharge was based upon one incident when I stood Captains' Mast for an unauthorized absence, one weekend in November 1999, and insubordinate towards a Petty Officer on that Friday.

I admit with hindsight that it was immature of me to react to Petty Officer S_'s aggression and assault, by leaving post, and that I should have gone through the chain of command and filed charges.  I mistakenly thought a mutual cooling off period would have sufficed.  I admitted my stupidity and immature judgement to the commander and received 45 days restriction, 45 days extra duty, and reduction of rank one pay grade.  I continued to serve my full term of enlistment.

I respectfully request that the board review this statement, consider my prior good conduct, and change my discharge to honorable.

Yours faithfully,

Documentation

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

Applicant's DD Form 214
One page from Applicant's service record
Character reference, dated July 24, 2002

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	950920 - 960324	COG
	Active:   None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  960325		Date of Discharge:  000324

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    04  00  00	Does not exclude lost time
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  19			Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  53

Highest Rate:  AKAN

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  NMF		Behavior:  NMF		OTA:  NMF

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  SSDR with Bronze Star, AFSM, AFEM with Bronze Star, NATA, MUC

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  6

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

GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/COMPLETION OF REQUIRED ACTIVE SERVICE, authority:  NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-104.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

000124:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86 (2 specs): Unauthorized absence, violation of UCMJ, Article 91: Insubordinate towards a petty officer.
	Award: Restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to AKAA.  No indication of appeal in the record.

000324:	DD Form 214: Applicant discharged with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of completion of required active service.  Applicant not available for signature.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 000324 with a characterization of general (under honorable conditions) for completion of required active service (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 states his character is demonstrated by his completion of obligated service and medals awarded.  The Board commends the Applicant for having completed his enlistment and for the awards he received, but his performance throughout his tenure in the Navy does not mitigate his unauthorized absence or his insubordination to a petty officer near the end of his enlistment.  The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, falls short of that required for an honorable characterization of service.  An upgrade to honorable would be inappropriate.  Relief denied.  For the Applicant’s edification, a general (under honorable) discharge is not considered a punitive discharge.  

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.  However, a less than fully honorable discharge or an unfavorable “RE” code is not, in itself, a bar to reenlistment.  A request for waiver is normally done during the processing of a formal application for enlistment through a recruiter.  Relief is therefore denied.  However, the Applicant may also petition to the Board of Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) to change the characterization of his 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 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, a positive employment record, documentation of community service, and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities, are examples of verifiable documents that should be provided to receive consideration for relief, based on post-service conduct.   

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 15560A), Change 18, effective 
12 Dec 97 until 26 Mar 00, Article 1910-104, COMPLETION OF REQUIRED ACTIVE SERVICE.

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