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

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

 ex-MM3, USN
Docket No. ND05-00671

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20050309.  The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable.  The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review.  The Applicant did not designate a representative on the DD Form 293.  Subsequent to the application, the applicant obtained representation by Disabled American Veterans.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20051206.  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 by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

“ - Convenience of the Government

- The underage drinking (2) and UA’s (3) were due to the ignorance of my youth.

- The dereliction of duty was watching television (it has come into my knowledge that many of my ancestors strongly oppose television).

- I am considering re-enlisting.” 

Additional issues submitted by Applicant’s representative (Disabled American Veterans):

“After a review of the Former Service Members (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 contention of the appellant in his request for an upgrade of his current Other Than Honorable Conditions (OTH) Discharge to that of Honorable.

The FSM served from July 6, 1995 to December 18, 1998 at which time he was discharged due to a Pattern of Misconduct.

The FSM contends that the improper activities that occurred during his military service were the result of his own ignorance of youth. 

This creates a need for a review of the application for consideration be given to equitable relief, as this is a matter that involves a determination whether a discharge should be changed under the equity standards, to include any issue upon which the Applicant submits to the Board’s discretionary authority, under SECNAVIST 5420.174D.

We ask for the Board’s 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. 

Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.”

Sincerely,
(not signed)
K_ L. G_ 
National Services Officer

Documentation

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

Applicant’s DD Form 214 (2)
Certificate of Commendation dtd September 23, 1998
Certificate of Completion for Personal Responsibility and Value Education and Training dtd February 1, 1996
Certificate of Appointment to Machinist’s Mate Third Class dtd February 16, 1996
Certificate of Completion for Nuclear Field “A” School dtd January 25, 1996

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive:  USNR (DEP)	19940728 – 19950705		COG
	Active:    None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  19950706		Date of Discharge:  19981218

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    03  05  11  (Does not exclude lost time.)
	Inactive:  None

Time Lost During This Period (days):

	Unauthorized absence:  2 days
	Confinement:		  none

Age at Entry:  18 

Years Contracted:  4 (22 month extension)

Education Level:  12				AFQT:  95

Highest Rate:  MM3

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  NA*		Behavior:  NA*		OTA:  NA*

Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, (as listed on the DD Form 214):  National Defense Service Medal, Armed Forces Service Medal, Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal.

* Not Available

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT, authority:  MILPERSMAN, Article 1910-140 (formerly 3630600).

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events: 

940728:	Program waiver approved for three times (3x) marijuana use for the Nuclear Field program.

960125:	Applicant completes the 36 hours of PREVENT training. 

960711:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92:  In that MM3 B_ did on 28JUN96 consume alcoholic beverages while under the age of twenty-one.
	Award:  Forfeiture of $100.00 per month for 2 months, oral admonition, restriction for 30 days, reduction to E-3.  No indication of appeal in the record.

970701:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92:  Violation of a other lawful written order.
	Award:  Forfeiture of $100.00 per month for 2 months, restriction for 30 days (suspended for 6 months).  No indication of appeal in the record.

971027:	Applicant undergoes LIP Alcohol Dependency Screening.
	Diagnosis: Alcohol abuse, may be headed toward dependency.

980106:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92:  Violate a lawful general order (drinking underage).
	Award:  Forfeiture of $200.00 per month for 1 month, restriction and extra duty for 30 days.  No indication of appeal in the record.

980306:	Applicant undergoes LIP Alcohol Dependency Screening.  
	Diagnosis:  Abuse, recommend Level II.

980811:	Applicant to unauthorized absence from USS T ROOSEVELT.

980813:	Applicant surrendered on board USS T ROOSEVELT. 

981119:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92:  Dereliction in the performance of duty.
	Award:  Forfeiture of $200.00 per month for 1 month, restriction and extra duty for 20 days (10 days suspended for 3 months), reduction to E-3 (suspended for 3 months).  No indication of appeal in the record.

981218:	DD Form 214: Applicant discharged under other than honorable conditions by reason of pattern of misconduct per MILPERSMAN 1910-104 and CCG8 LTR of 13DEC98.

Service Record did not contain the Administrative Discharge package. 
Service Record was missing elements of the Summary of Service.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 19981218 by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct (A and B) with a service characterization of under other than honorable conditions.  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).  The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (E).

The Applicant contends that his problems in the Navy can be attributed to “the ignorance of my youth".  While he may feel that his youth and abuse of alcohol were the underlying causes of his misconduct, the record clearly reflects his willful misconduct and demonstrated he was unfit for further service.  The evidence of record did not show that the Applicant was either not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions.  Relief denied.

When the service of a member of the U.S. Navy has been honest and faithful, it is appropriate to characterize that service as honorable.  An under other than honorable conditions discharge 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 4 nonjudicial punishment proceedings for violations of Articles 92 (violation of a other lawful written order, violation of a lawful general order, dereliction in the performance of duty) of the UCMJ.  Violations of UCMJ Article 92 are considered serious offenses.  Further, the Applicant was UA for 2 days, a violation of UCMJ Article 86, but the offense was not adjudicated.  The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, reflects his willful failure to meet the requirements of his contract with the U.S. Navy and falls far short of that required for an upgrade of his characterization of service.  Relief is not warranted.

Since the NDRB has no jurisdiction over reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Navy, Marine Corps, or any other of the Armed Forces, NDRB is not authorized to change a reenlistment code.  An unfavorable “RE” code is, in itself, not a bar to reenlistment.  A request for a waiver can be submitted during the processing of a formal application for reenlistment through a recruiter.  Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) can make changes to reenlistment codes.

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 documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments or any other evidence related to his discharge 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), Change 18, effective
12 Dec 1997 until 21 Aug 2002, Article 1910-140 (formerly 3630600), SEPARATION BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT - PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT.

B.  The Manual for Courts-Martial authorizes the award of a punitive discharge if adjudged as part of the sentence upon conviction by a special or general court-martial for violation of the UCMJ, Article 92, violation of a other lawful written order, violation of a lawful general order, and dereliction in the performance of duty.

C.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part V, Para 502, Propriety.

D.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part V, Para 503, Equity.

E.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part II, Para 211, Regularity of Government Affairs.  

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 “http://Boards.law.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:

		Secretary of the Navy Council of Review Boards
		Attn:  Naval Discharge Review Board
		720 Kennon Street SE Rm 309
		Washington Navy Yard DC  20374-5023