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

 ex-ATAA, USNR(TAR)
Docket No. ND00-00098 

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 991025, 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 000727.  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/PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-140 (formerly 3630600).

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

1. I paid $1200 into MGIB and served four years in the Navy honorably with commendations.
I was discharged six months into an extension for not adapting to East Coast Navy life having recently transferred from the West Coast -- where I was "brought up" in the Navy, so to speak.
Some people with less time served honorably, still reap MGIB benefits I am currently denied.
I now have a successful career in the buisness machine industry and wish to add degree credentials to my experience.
Please consider my application with regard to my naval highlights, which are far more significant, and my desire to further better myself now.
Thank you

Documentation

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

Copy of DD Form 214 (Member 1) (2 copies)

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Active:   None
	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	940315 - 940323	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  940324		Date of Discharge:  980904

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    04  05  12
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  18			Years Contracted:  4 (24 months extension)

Education Level:  10			AFQT:  79

Highest Rate:  ATAN

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  NMF			Behavior:  NMF		OTA:  NMF

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  NDSM, GCM

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT, authority:  NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-140 (formerly 3630600).

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

The applicant’s entire discharge package was not available.  The Board assumed regularity in the conduct of government affairs.

970915:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 109: Destruction of personal property, violation of UCMJ Article 117:Provoking speeches or gestures.
	Award:  Forfeiture of 7 days pay, extra duty for 14 days, reduction to ATAA.  Forfeiture and reduction suspended for 6 months.  No indication of appeal in the record.

980220:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence, violation of UCMJ Article 112: Drunk on duty.
	Award:  Restriction for 30 days.  Restriction suspended for 4 months.  No indication of appeal in the record.

980319:	Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (Substandard performance in case of alcohol incident number 2.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning. 

980621:	Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (Failure to obey a lawful order by driving on base after suspension of your base driving privileges.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning. 

980816:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 134 (2 specs): (1) Weapon, concealed, carrying, (2) Unlawful entry.
	Award:  Forfeiture of $495 per month for 2 months, restriction for 60 days, reduction to ATAA.  No indication of appeal in the record.

980817:	Commanding officer recommended discharge under Other Than Honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a Pattern of misconduct.   Commanding officer’s comments (verbatim): ATAA (applicant) has demonstrated a clear pattern of misconduct during his short Naval career.  His actions are inconsistent with Navy policy.  He has continually demonstrated a complete lack of conformity to naval standards and the Navy Core Values.  I strongly recommend an Other Than Honorable discharge.

980901:	COMSUBGRU TWO directed the applicant's discharge under Other Than Honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a Pattern of misconduct.

980921:	Applicant pending court dated scheduled for 21Sep98 for criminal trespass and loaded firearm in a motor vehicle.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 980904 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).

In the applicant’s issue 1, the Board determined this issue is without merit.  The applicant states he paid $1200 into the MGIB, he has a successful civilian career and wants to add degree credentials to his experience.  The Board is under no obligation to upgrade an individual’s discharge for the sole purpose of allowing him to continue his/her education.  The discharge was proper and equitable.  Relief denied.

The following is provided for the benefit of the applicant.  There is no law or regulation that provides for the upgrade of an unfavorable discharge based solely on the passage of time or good conduct, subsequent to leaving military service.  The NDRB reviews the propriety (did the Navy follow its own rules in processing the applicant for discharge) and equity (did the applicant receive a discharge characterization in keeping with Navy guidance or was the characterization typical of other service members being separated for the same reason) of each applicant’s discharge to determine if proper procedures were followed.  This applicant’s discharge was proper and equitable.  Additionally, the NDRB is authorized to award clemency for post-service factors (what has the applicant done since discharge to become a contributing member of his/her community and to society in general).  Those factors include but are not limited to the following:  Evidence of continuing educational pursuits (transcripts, diploma, degree or vocational-technical certificates), a verifiable employment history (letter of recommendation from employer), documentation of community service (letter from activity/community group), certificate of non-involvement with civil authorities (police records check) and proof of not using drugs (detoxification certificate).  The applicant did not provide any documentation to demonstrate good character and conduct.  The applicant is encouraged to continue to establish a reputation of good character and document his accomplishments.  Documentation to support any claim of good character is a must to receive any consideration based on post-service achievements.  The applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, to discuss his post-service accomplishments, provided an application is received by the NDRB within fifteen years from the date of his discharge.  Legal representation at the hearing is advisable.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 18, effective
12 Dec 1997 until Present, Article 1910-140 (formerly 3630600), SEPARATION BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT - 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