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

 ex-FR, USN
Docket No. ND02-00683

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 020415, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable and the reason for the discharge be changed to Secretarial Authority.  The Applicant requested a personal appearance discharge review in the Washington National Capital Region.  The Applicant designated the Veterans of Foreign Wars as the 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 030116.  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 and reason for 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, as submitted

1.  Upon enlisting in the Navy my recruiting informed me that turning down my C school wouldn't interfere with my choice of job title.  (IC)

When arriving to my ship I was place in the BT Division because of shortness of availability.  I did not wish to be a Thermodynamic Engineer.  What I became wasn't a silent voice who couldn't get no help.

Submitted by VFW:
2.  We support the Applicant's that his discharge be changed. 

We refer this case to the Board for their careful and compassionate consideration and request the Applicant's discharge be reviewed for upgraded.

Documentation

Only the Applicant's service and medical records were reviewed, the Applicant did not provide additional documentation for the Board to consider. 

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	890616 - 890804	ELS (Apathy)
					900330 - 900806	HON

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  900807		Date of Discharge:  920714

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    01  11  08
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  20			Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  48

Highest Rate:  FA

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  2.6 (1)	Behavior:  2.8 (1)		OTA:  2.6
[EXTRACTED FROM CO's MSG 06JUN92.]

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/Misconduct – Pattern of misconduct, authority:  NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

901030:	Retention Warning from RTC Great Lakes:  Advised of deficiency (fraudulent entry into naval service as evidenced by failure to disclose pre-service civil involvement - charged with careless driving 7/88, paid fine of $70.00), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.  

910722:	Applicant acknowledged that his civilian clothing privileges were revoked due to failure to maintain full sea bag.  Applicant can request reinstatement upon satisfactory demonstration that a full sea bag is in his possession.  Applicant acknowledged that failure to procure and maintain a full sea bag might result in further disciplinary action.

910925:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86:  Failure to go to appointed place of duty, violation of UCMJ Article 107 (2 Specs):  Falsifying official statements.  
	Award:  Forfeiture of $300 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 35 days, reduction to E-1.  No indication of appeal in the record.
                    [EXTRACTED FROM CO, USS BOWEN'S MSG 06JUN92.]

911023:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86 (7 Spec):  Absent from appointed place of duty, restricted men's muster.  
	Award:  Forfeiture of $175 per month for 2 months, restriction for 21 days.  No indication of appeal in the record.
                    [EXTRACTED FROM CO, USS BOWEN'S MSG 06JUN92.]

911024:	Retention Warning from USS BOWEN:  Advised of deficiency (unauthorized absence, missing restricted men's musters, and substandard performance), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.  [Applicant refused to sign, as witnessed by LTJG B_.]
	
911205:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86 (2 Specs):  Absent from appointed place of duty, restricted men's muster. 
	Award:  Forfeiture of $100 per month for 2 months (2nd month suspended for 6 months), and 30 days correctional custody unit.  No indication of appeal in the record.
                    [EXTRACTED FROM CO, USS BOWEN'S MSG 06JUN92.]

911206:	Applicant acknowledged derogatory contents on performance evaluation report for the period 90NOV27 to 91DEC06.

920423:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86:  Unauthorized absence for a period of 23 hours and 25 minutes, violation of UCMJ Article 117:  Provoking speeches.  
Award:  Forfeiture of $150 per month for 1 months, restriction and extra duty for 15 days.  No indication of appeal in the record.
[EXTRACTED FROM CO, USS BOWEN'S MSG 06JUN92.]

920430:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92:  Failure to obey a lawful written order by wearing civilian clothes on board while in a restricted status,  violation of UCMJ Article 92:  Dereliction in the performance of duties for sleeping on watch; violation of UCMJ Article 134: Breaking restriction in Halifax, Canada on 24 April 1992.  
	Award:  Forfeiture of $390 per month for 2 months, 3 days bread and water.  No indication of appeal in the record.
                    [EXTRACTED FROM CO, USS BOWEN'S MSG 06JUN92.]

920430:	CO, USS BOWEN 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 NJP actions while on-board command.  
                    [EXTRACTED FROM CO, USS BOWEN'S MSG 06JUN92.]

920528:	Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights except the right to obtain copies of the documents used to support the basis for the separation and the right to make a written statement.  Applicant did not object to separation.  
                    [EXTRACTED FROM CO, USS BOWEN'S MSG 06JUN92.]

9205xx:	Applicant's Statement (verbatim):  "Throughout my life I haven't received the treatment I did in B-Division on board the USS BOWEN, but as I have been told time and time again, nobody forced me to raise my hand.  My life has been flawless through school.  I have no criminal records, and I'm not going to let the U.S. Navy interfere with the rest of my life.  My only excuse is that I'm not Navy or military material.  I couldn't adapt to the life style - sorry.  My future plans are to go to school and take up drama and business marketing".  
                    [EXTRACTED FROM CO, USS BOWEN'S MSG 06JUN92.]

920606:	Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.  Commanding Officer’s comments (verbatim):  [FR (Applicant) has no potential for further naval service.  His frequent violations of the UCMJ along with his unsatisfactory performance warrant immediate discharge.  FR (Applicant) has over the course of 20 months on board BOWEN received an abundant amount of personal counseling and he has made it more than clear his lack of interest in performing his duties and his total disregard for authority.  As mentioned above, FR (Applicant) received a Page 13 counseling/warning on 24 October 1991 after his second mast.  SNM refused to sign this Page 13, and that was witnessed by my Executive Officer and his Division Officer.  FR (Applicant) is an unsatisfactory individual.  Despite counseling he has repeatedly shown a total disregard for authority and does not show any inclination in improving his performance.  He should be discharged from the Navy expeditiously as soon as possible with an other than honorable discharge.]

920611:	BUPERS 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 920714 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 was properly and equitably processed for separation for a pattern of misconduct.  The Applicant’s service record is marred by award of non-judicial punishment (NJP) on five occasions, to include the appropriate retention and discharge warnings.  The Applicant’s summary of service clearly reflects the Applicant’s disobedience of the orders and directives that regulate good order and discipline in the naval service, and demonstrated he was unsuitable for further service.  The record is devoid of evidence that the Applicant was not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions.  Relief denied.

The following is provided for the Applicant’s information:  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, a positive employment record, documentation of community service, certification of non-involvement with civil authorities, are examples of verifiable documents that should have been provided to receive consideration for relief, based on post-service conduct.  

The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of discharge.  The Applicant can provide additional documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments at that time.  Representation at a personal appearance hearing is recommended but not required.  

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C, effective 15 Aug 91 until 
04 Mar 93), 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