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

  ex-SR, USN
Docket No. ND03-00144

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 20021029, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable.  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 20030926.  After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the Applicant’s service was discovered by the NDRB.  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, as submitted

1.  I had some problems when I was in the service, but I don’t feel the trouble I got into warranted an Other than Honorable Conditions discharge. I have accepted responsibility for my actions, and have learned though the hard way that my actions not only affect myself, but those people around me.  I was head strong when I was in the military, and there for got into trouble.  Since my release from the military I have learned what it takes to be an audit and be responsible.

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):

	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	19860828 - 19870108	COG
	Active:   None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  19870109		Date of Discharge:  19891128

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    02  10  20
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  19			Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  25

Highest Rate:  SN

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  3.40 (1)	Behavior:  2.60 (1)		OTA:  2.80

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:

870813:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86:  Unauthorized absence on 870720, violation of UCMJ, Article 87: Missing ship’s movement on 870720.
	Award: Restriction and extra duty for 7 days.  No indication of appeal in the record.

870813:	Retention Warning from USS THORN (DD 988):  Advised of deficiency (Substandard military conduct with regard to accepting and carrying out directives issued to you by your Leading Petty Officer, Chief Petty Officer, Division Officer and Department Head.  Substandard performance in following orders and regulations.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning. 

871123:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 91: Disrespect on 871123, violation of UCMJ, Article 128: Assault on 871123, violation of UCMJ, Article 134: Communicating a threat on 871123.
	Award: Forfeiture of $100 per month for 1 month, restriction and extra duty for 14 days, reduction to SR.  Reduction suspended for 6 months.  No indication of appeal in the record.

871123:	Retention Warning from USS THORN (DD 988):  Advised of deficiency (Substandard military conduct with regard to accepting and carrying out directives issued to you by your Leading Petty Officer, Chief Petty Officer, Division Officer and Department Head.  Substandard performance in following orders and regulations.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning. 

890502:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 128: Assault on 890419.
	Award: Extra duty for 30 days.  No indication of appeal in the record.

890908:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 128: Assault on 890815.
	Award: Forfeiture of $100 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 30 days, reduction to SA.  No indication of appeal in the record.

891020:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 91: Contempt on 890923.
	Award: Forfeiture of $349 per month for 1 month, reduction to SR.  No indication of appeal in the record.

891030:	USS THORN (DD 988) notified Applicant of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.  [Extracted from Commanding Officer’s message dated 891103.]

891030:	Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights.  [Extracted from Commanding Officer’s message dated 891103.]

891103:	Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.
891110:	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 19891128 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 the trouble he was involved in did not warrant an Other Than Honorable discharge.

Violation of UCMJ Article 87 (missing ship’s movement), Article 91 (contempt), and Article 134 (communicating a threat), for which the Applicant was found guilty of at NJP, are serious offenses which could have resulted in a punitive discharge (BCD or DD) if adjudged at a Special or General court martial.  The Applicant did not receive a punitive discharge.  Therefore, he was not punished to the fullest extent of his former Commanding Officer’s authority.  The discharge was proper and equitable.  Relief denied.

The following is provided for the edification of the Applicant.  Normally, to permit relief, an error or inequity must have occurred during the execution of the discharge for the period of enlistment in question.  No errors or inequities were discovered during the execution of this discharge.  The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge.  However, 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.  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 can be considered.  Examples of documentation to forward to the Board include proof of educational pursuits, verifiable employment record(s), documentation of community service, certification of non-involvement with civil authorities, and credible evidence of a substance free lifestyle (if appropriate).  At this time, the applicant has not provided any documentation for the Board to consider.  Therefore, no relief will be granted.

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.  Representation at a personal appearance hearing is recommended but not required.

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