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

 ex-HR, USN
Docket No. ND00-00314

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 000110, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions.  The applicant requested a personal appearance hearing discharge review.  The applicant did not list any representative on the DD Form 293.  In the acknowledgement letter to the applicant, he was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 000810.  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 (verbatim)

1.  I am requesting a review hearing based on the fact that I was unjustly discharged from active duty status.  One of the reasons for my discharge was because of a civilian allegation of trying to cash a counterfeit check.  The case was viewed as a "Stet" document, meaning that as long as I don't have any similar altercations, the case will be dismissed after one (1) year from February 01, 1999.  I also was discharged because being late reporting to duty on several occasions.  For the most part my character was/is good.  I am requesting a "higher" discharge status because I feel as though I deserve it.  I also would like to be able to utilize my VA benefits, and possibly, one day, reenter the military or at least have the option to.

Documentation

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

Copy of Order from District Court of Maryland for Prince George's County
Copies of Evaluation Report & Counseling Records (2pgs)
Copies of Letters of Appreciation (2) 
Copies of DD Form 214 (2)

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Active:  USN 			None
	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	961127 - 970316	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  970317		Date of Discharge:  990129

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:  01  10  13
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  17			Years Contracted:  4 (12 months extension)

Education Level:  11			AFQT:  72

Highest Rate:  HN

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  NMA		Behavior:  NMA		OTA:  NMA

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  Expert Rifleman Medal 

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:

981119:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 81: Conspiracy, violation of UCMJ Article 107: False Official Statement.
	Award:  Forfeiture of $519.00 per month for 2 months (suspend 1 months for 6 months), extra duty for 30 days, reduction to E-2 (suspended for 6 months) .  No indication of appeal in the record.

981119:	Administrative counseling/warning issued [EXTRACTED FROM CO'S MESSAGE].

941111:	Punishment of RIR and forfeiture of $519.00 pay per month for 1 month suspended at CO's NJP of 981119 vacated this date due to continued misconduct.

990114:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: (2 Specs), Unauthorized absence, violation of UCMJ Article 91: Willful disobedience of a Chief Petty Officer, violation of UCMJ Article 92: Dereliction in the performance of duties.
	Award:  Extra duty for 15 days, reduction to HR.  No indication of appeal in the record.

990114:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and misconduct due to commission of a serious offense as evidenced by two Commanding Officer's NJPs of 981119 and 990114, for violation of the UCMJ, Article 81, 91, and 107.

990114:  	Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights.

990513:	Commander, National Naval Medical Center directed discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 990129 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).

The applicant states in issue 1 that he was “unjustly discharged from active duty status.”  The Board found that the applicant was properly discharged from the service for misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct based on his 2 NJPs.  The Board finds no evidence that his “allegation of trying to cash a counterfeit check” was the reason he was discharged.  The applicant had a pattern of misconduct to include conspiracy, making a false official statement, UA, disobedience of a Chief Petty Officer and dereliction of duty.  The Board finds that the applicant was given his proper rights and discharged equitably for the offenses committed.

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 in the civilian life subsequent to leaving the Service.  However, the Board is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge (D).  Those factors include, but are not limited to, the following:  evidence of continuing educational pursuits (transcripts, diplomas, degrees, vocational-technical certificates), a verifiable employment record (Letter of Recommendation from boss), documentation of community service (letter from the activity/community group), certification of non-involvement with civil authorities (police records check) and proof of his not using drugs (detoxification certificate, AA meeting attendance or letter documenting participation in the program) in order for consideration for clemency based on post-service conduct.  At this time, the applicant has not provided any documentation of good character and conduct.  Therefore no relief will be granted.  The applicant is encouraged to continue with his pursuits and is reminded that he is eligible for a personal appearance hearing provided the application is received within 15-years from the date of discharge.

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