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

ex-QMSR, USN
Docket No. ND01-00745

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 010508, 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 020130.  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.  My discharge from service occurred when I was a young person that made mistakes that had to be paid for.  I have been a good citizen, and I believe I paid through the years for my past.  Over the years I have received an Associate Degree, married, and become a father for the first time while working consistently, paying taxes, and supporting my community.  I humbly request an upgrade of my discharge to general/under honorable from other than honorable so that I may start to feel like a better person, in order to be even better person more so every day. 

Documentation

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

None

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Active:   USN			None
	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	860909 - 860923	COG

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  860924		Date of Discharge:  881123

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    02  02  00
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  21			Years Contracted:  4 

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  84

Highest Rate:  QMSA

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  3.15 (4)	Behavior:  1.65 (4)		OTA:  2.75

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  SSDR

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:

880405:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence for a period of 3 hours and thirty five minutes, violation of UCMJ Article 92: Your failure to obey a lawful regulation issued by COMNAVBASE SAN DIEGO in regards to the curfew imposed it Tijuana, Mexico on 880404, violation of UCMJ Article 107: You did with the intent to deceive, make an official statement to the facts surrounding the curfew violation that occurred in Tijuana, Mexico on the evening of 880404.
	Award:  Forfeiture of 1/2 pay per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction in rate.  No indication of appeal in the record.

880422:	Retention Warning from [USS GOLDSBOROUGH (DDG-20)]:  Advised of deficiency (CO's NJP of 880406 for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence for a period of 3 hours and thirty five minutes, date of offense 880405, violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Your failure to obey a lawful regulation issued by COMNAVBASE SAN DIEGO in regards to the curfew imposed it Tijuana, Mexico, date of offense 880404; violation of UCMJ, Article 107: You did with the intent to deceive, make an official statement to the facts surrounding the curfew violation that occurred in Tijuana, Mexico on the evening of 880404), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning. 

880715:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence from USS GOLDSBOROUGH (DDG-20) for a period of 30 minutes, violation of UCMJ Article 116: Breach of Peace, violation of UCMJ Article 128: Assault; violation of UCMJ, Article 134: Disorderly conduct, drunkenness.
	Award:  Forfeiture of $335.00 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days.  No indication of appeal in the record.

880929:	Substance abuse report indicates applicant is alcohol dependent.

881006:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence from USS GOLDSBOROUGH (DDG-20) for a period of 3 hours, violation of UCMJ Article 92: Disobey a lawful order issued by Commanding Officer USS GOLDSBOROUGH and COMDESRON FIVE Medical Officer.
Award:  Forfeiture of $355.00 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days.  No indication of appeal in the record.

881006:	Medical evaluation for alcohol abuse indicates applicant is alcohol dependent.

881006:	USS GOLDSBOROUGH] notified applicant of intended recommendation for discharge under Other Than Honorable conditions by reason of misconduct as evidence by commission of a serious offense and a Pattern of misconduct.

881006:  	Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights.

881006:	Applicant declined medical treatment at VA Hospital.

881007:	Commanding officer recommended discharge under Other Than Honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due as evidenced by Commission  of a serious offense and a Pattern of misconduct. 

881107:	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 881123 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).

Issue 1.  The applicant states, his discharge occurred when he was young.  He now has an Associates degree and is married.  He’s a good citizen that is employed, paying taxes and supporting his community.  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 an upgrade, based on post-service conduct.  The applicant did not provide any of these documents.  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 is denied.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560A, effective 870615 - 890110), Article 3630600, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED MEMBERS 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