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

 ex-FR, USN
Docket No. ND01-00684

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 010417, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable.  The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review.  The applicant listed Disabled American Veterans as his representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 011127.  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 HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL)/Misconduct - Pattern of misconduct, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

1.  After reviewing the Former Service Member (FSM) DD Form 293 Application for the Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the Armed Forces of the United States and all of the evidence assembled for review, we continue to note the contentions as set forth on the application by the appellant of an upgrade of his current General, Under Honorable Conditions discharge to that of Honorable. The record reflects the FSM served in the United States Navy from September 2, 1988 to August 13, 1991, at which time he was discharged as noted above for pattern of misconduct. The FSM requests equitable relief in the manner as noted above, he believes his discharge currently held was unfair and given without due consideration to his previous good service and high proficiency marks.  Also of record attesting to the FSM's job performance is a statement from LCDR D____ S___, who notes that he would have given the FSM almost all high marks on evaluation.
We ask for the boards careful and sympathetic consideration of all the evidence of record used in rendering a fair and impartial decision.  These issues do not supersede any issues previously submitted by the applicant. 

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)	880812 - 880901	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  880902		Date of Discharge:  910813

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    02  11  12
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  20			Years Contracted:  4 

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  27

Highest Rate:  FN

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  3.05 (4)	Behavior:  3.10 (4)		OTA:  3.10

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  NDSM, SSDR

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None

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

UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL)/Misconduct - Pattern of misconduct, authority:  NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

891220:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence.
	Award:  Forfeiture of $250.00 per month for 2 months.  No indication of appeal in the record.

900223:	Retention Warning from [USS ORION (AS-18)]:  Advised of deficiency (Violation of the UCMJ, Article 91, Insubordinate Conduct toward a petty officer), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning. 

900223:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 91: Insubordinate conduct toward a Superior Petty Officer.
	Award:  Forfeiture of $200.00 per month for 1 month.  No indication of appeal in the record.

901129:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 91: Willful disobedience towards a Superior Petty Officer, violation of UCMJ Article 128: Assault, violation of UCMJ Article 134: Drunk and disorderly.
	Award:  Forfeiture of $405.00 per month for 2 months, reduction to E-2.  Appealed.

910219:	Appealed denied.

910425:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 87: Missing ship's movement.
Award:  Forfeiture of $376.95 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to E-1.  No indication of appeal in the record.

910426:	[USS ORION (AS-18)] notified applicant of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and commission of a serious offense as evidenced by your non-judicial punishments of 891220, 900223, 901129 and 910425.

910426:  	Applicant advised of his rights and having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to appear before an Administrative Discharge Board.

910501:	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 and commission of a serious offense, that the misconduct warranted separation, and recommended discharge general under honorable conditions.

910528:	Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and commission of serious offense.

910627:	BUPERS directed the applicant's discharge under honorable conditions (general) 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 910813 under honorable conditions (general) 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).

Issue 1.  The applicant believes his discharge was unfair and given without due consideration to his previous good service and high proficiency marks.  The Board disagrees.  Less than honorable conditions is warranted when significant negative aspects of a member's conduct or performance of duty outweigh the positive aspects of the member's military record.  The applicant’s service was marred by award of nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for offenses triable by court-martial on four occasions and adverse counseling entries on another occasion.  The applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, reflects his willful disobedience of the orders and directives which regulate good order and discipline in naval service, and falls short of that required for an honorable characterization of service.  An upgrade to honorable would be inappropriate.

Normally, to permit relief, an error or injustice must have existed during the period of enlistment in question.  No such error or injustice occurred during the applicant’s enlistment.  Additionally, 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, an employment record, documentation of community service, certification of non-involvement with civil authorities and proof of his not using drugs, are examples of verifiable documents that should have been provided to receive consideration for relief, based on post-service conduct.  The applicant did not provide sufficient documentation to warrant an upgrade to his discharge.  He is reminded that he remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of his discharge.  The applicant can provide additional documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments at that time.  Legal representation at a personal appearance hearing is highly recommended but not required.  Relief denied.

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 “afls10.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