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

 ex-FN, USNR
Docket No. ND00-00802

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 000612, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to General/under Honorable conditions.  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 001206.  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 3630600.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

1.  I request that my discharge to be changed from a Other Than Honorable to a General discharge Under Honorable Conditions, and my RE-code to be changed from RE-4 to RE-3, because of the fact, the Navy was at fault by not paying me my correct pay.  And also I request that the cases in my service record to be reviewed that are pending on me.

Documentation

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

Statement from applicant

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Active:   None
	Inactive: None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  950815		Date of Discharge:  971230

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    02  04  16
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  19			Years Contracted:  8

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  31

Highest Rate:  SN

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  2.67 (3)	Behavior:  2.33 (3)		OTA:  2.61

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  NDSM 

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 3630600.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

950913:	Applicant to Recruit Training, Great Lakes, IL.

970123:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 107: Making false official statement on 5Jan97, violation of UCMJ, Article 121: Wrongful appropriation on 5Jan97, violation of UCMJ, Article 134: False or unauthorized pass offenses on 5Jan97.
	Award: Restriction and extra duty for 30 days, reduction to SA.  Reduction suspended for 6 months.  No indication of appeal in the record.

970123:	Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (False official statement, wrongful appropriation, false or unauthorized pass offenses.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning. 

971016:	Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (Altercation with another shipmate on August 27, 1997.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning. 

971205:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence on 19Oct97, violation of UCMJ Article 107: False official statement on 19Oct97.
	Award: Restriction and extra duty for 45 days.  No indication of appeal in the record.

971205:	Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (Unauthorized absence and false official statement.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning. 

	Discharge package missing.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 971230 under Other Than Honorable conditions for misconduct due to a Pattern of misconduct (A).  The applicant’s service record is incomplete.  A portion of his discharge package is missing.  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 determined that the discharge was proper and equitable (C and D).

Issue 1.  The applicant requested that his discharge be changed to General Under Honorable Conditions and his re-enlistment code be changed from RE-4 to RE-3.  The applicant provided a personal statement/letter to the Board but did not provide any verifiable evidence or documentation to support upgrading the characterization of his discharge.  The NDRB does not have the authority to change a members re-enlistment code (RE code).  The applicant must petition the Board of Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) to have his RE code changed.  The Board determined there are no grounds for upgrading the applicant’s discharge.  Relief denied.

The applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received at the NDRB within fifteen years from the date of the applicant’s discharge.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C, Change 14, effective 03 Oct 96 until 11 Dec 97), 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