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

 ex-FR, USN
Docket No. ND00-00433

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 000215, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable.  The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review.  The applicant listed VETERANS OF FOREIGN WARS as his representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 000907.  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/Misconduct - Pattern of misconduct, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

1.  We ask the Board to consider the applicant's case IAW SECNAV Instruction 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (MDR 1984), enclosure (1), chapter 9, paragraph 9.3, Equity of Discharge.

2.  We ask the Board to consider the applicant's case IAW SECNAV Instruction 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (MDR 1984), enclosure (1), chapter 9, paragraph 9.2, Propriety of Discharge.

Documentation

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

Copy of DD Form 214

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Active:   USN			None
	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	891010 - 891126	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  891127		Date of Discharge:  900724

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    00  07  28
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  20			Years Contracted:  4 

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  53

Highest Rate:  FR

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  1.00 (1)	Behavior:  1.00 (1)		OTA:  1.00

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  None 

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None 

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/Misconduct - Pattern of misconduct, authority:  NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

900322:	Retention Warning from [Naval Technical Center, Treasure Island, San Francisco, CA]:  Advised of deficiency (Violation of the UCMJ, Article 92 , Failure to obey order or regulation) (Violation of the UCMJ, Article 91: Disrespect to a Petty Officer), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning. 

900402:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Failure to obey order or regulation, to wit: NAVTECHTRACENINST 5453.2A DTD 16NOV87 having visitors in the BEQ after liberty hours , violation of UCMJ Article 86: UA from 2300, 900325 until 01000, 900326.
	Award:  Forfeiture of $300.00 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 21 days.  No indication of appeal in the record.

900417:	Retention Warning from [Naval Technical Center, Treasure Island, San Francisco, CA]:  Advised of deficiency (Violation of the UCMJ, Article 86 (UA), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning. 

900417:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: UA from 0530, 900406 until 0555, 900406.
	Award:  Forfeiture of $300.00 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 14 days.  No indication of appeal in the record.

900524:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 91: Disrespect in deportment toward a First Class Petty Officer, by saying to him "It's in my fucken pocket", "Whaa, Whaa", or words to that effect.
	Award:  Forfeiture of $300 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 21 days.  No indication of appeal in the record.

900601:	[Naval Technical Training Center, Treasure Island] 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.

900606:  	Applicant advised of his rights and having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27b, elected to appear before an Administrative Discharge Board.

900626:	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 under other than honorable conditions.

900703:	Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.  

900713:	CNMPC directed the applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 900724 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 Board considered the applicant’s first issue regarding the Equity of Discharge and found based on the applicant’s length of service and documented misconduct that the discharge was equitable as issued.  Relief is not warranted.

The Board considered the applicant’s second issue and after a thorough record review found no impropriety in the applicant’s discharge.  Relief is not warranted.

The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the re characterization of a discharge.  The applicant must be aware that 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 the civilian life subsequent to leaving the service.  Normally, to permit relief, an error or injustice must have been found to have existed during the period of enlistment in question.  Outstanding post-service conduct, 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, may be considered by the NDRB.  

The applicant is reminded that he is eligible for a personal appearance hearing provided the application is received within 15 years from the date of discharge.  Representation at personal appearance hearing is highly recommended.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560A, Change 8 effective 21 Aug 89 until 14 Aug 91), 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