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

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

 ex-MMFA, USN 
Docket No. ND05-01253

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20050725.  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.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20060406.  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 reason for discharge shall not change.  The discharge shall remain General (Under Honorable Conditions) by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application: 

“When I enlisted I was under the impression that was given to me by my recruiter, that as a undesignated fireman, I would be able to choose my rate once I join and get to my command. So once I was settled in evidentially that was not the case.  I spoke to my chain of command about my situation and they told me I must become senior in rate first. So I received a lot of info like that, I gave them the benefit of the doubt and trusted them, even after inquiring through other sources that informed me otherwise.  So I was one of the first FN to become senior in rate, I had my sights set on being a master at arms so I was really focused to impress my chain of command. Well I basically got the run around my first couple of years.  Around that time I had a conversation with my very influential chief M_, which did not go well.  I told him I needed assistance and information on how to become a master at arms.  He was determined to change my mind. He wanted me to stay a FN and become a MM3 (Designated).  He became very upset and told me even if I take the MA exam and pass I would be a MA3 in the mm room with him.  That’s when all major issues about me became I really believe I was involved in a bad end of a conspiracy after that point.”

“I spoke to the Chaplain on several occasion about my situation, I also have a few documented visit with the equal OPS Master Chief B_ & Senior Chief that was assigned prior to my departure of the command CVN-76.” 

Applicant’s Remarks:  (Taken from the DD Form 293): I had a very important surgery that never took place.  That was influenced by my late Chief MMC J_.  All those guys were real buddy-buddy with each other that had a great negative impact on my military career.  When I enlisted my intentions were to become a U.S. Navy SEAL or search and rescue swimmer.  Please help me recharge my positive status as far as my military career follows.

Documentation

Only the service and medical records was reviewed.  The Applicant did not provide additional documentation for the Board’s consideration.

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive:  USNR (DEP)	20001212 – 20001218		COG
	Active:    None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  20001219		Date of Discharge:  20040324

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    03  03  05  (Does exclude lost time.)
	Inactive:  None

Time Lost During This Period (days):

	Unauthorized absence:  43 days
	Confinement:		  18 days

Age at Entry:  22

Years Contracted:  4 

Education Level:  10				AFQT:  51

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.

*Not available

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

GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/MISCONDUCT, authority:  MILPERSMAN, Article 1910-142 (formerly 3630605).

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events: 

001212:	Pre-service waiver for one non-minor misdemeanor chart “C”.

021008:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92:  Dereliction of duty.
	Award:  Forfeiture of $200.00 per month for 2 months, extra duty for 15 days.  No indication of appeal in the record.

021220:	Retention Warning:  Advised of deficiency (CO’s NJP of 08 October 2002 for VUMCJ, Article 92, Dereliction of duty, to wit: sleeping on watch.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

030501:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86:  Unauthorized absence.
Violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Violation or failure to obey other lawful written order, to wit: By wrongfully using his cell phone in the propulsion plant.
	Award:  Restriction and extra duty for 30 days, reduction in rank..  No indication of appeal in the record.

040112:	Summary Court-Martial.
	Charge:  violation of the UCMJ, Article 86 (4 spec).  Plea: Guilty. Findings: Guilty.
	Specification 1: At or about 0130, 9 October 2003, without authority absent himself from USS RONALD REAGAN until at or 0930, 9 October 2003.  Plea: Guilty.  Findings: Guilty.
Specification 2: On or about 9 October 2003, without authority absent himself from USS RONALD REAGAN until on or about 17 October 2003.  Plea: Guilty.  Findings: Guilty.
Specification 3: On or about 20 October 2003, without authority absent himself from USS RONALD REAGAN until on or about 19 November 2003.  Plea: Guilty.  Findings: Guilty.
Specification 4: On or about 24 November 2003, without authority absent himself from USS RONALD REAGAN until on or about 2 December 2003.  Plea: Guilty.  Findings: Guilty.
	Charge II: violation of the UCMJ, Article 92: (2 specs).  Plea: Not Guilty. Findings: Not Guilty.
	Specification 1: Dereliction of duty on 7 September 2003. Plea: Not Guilty.  Findings: Not Guilty
	Specification 2: Failure to obey other lawful order on 30 December 2003.   Plea: Not Guilty.  Findings: Not Guilty
	Sentence: Confinement for 24 days, reduced to E-2.
	CA action:  Not found in the record.
	
040112:	To confinement.

040131:	From confinement.

040202:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with the least favorable characterization of service as under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct pattern of misconduct and misconduct commission of a serious offense.

040213:	Applicant advised of rights and having consulted with counsel, elected to appear before an Administrative Discharge Board.

040213:	Applicant submitted a Conditional Waiver Request for General (Under Honorable Condition) discharge in lieu of Administrative Discharge Board to USS RONALD REAGAN (CVN-76).
 
040305:	Commanding Officer, USS RONALD REAGAN (CVN 76), recommended discharge with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct commission of a serious offense and pattern of misconduct.  Commanding Officer’s comments:  “Machinist’s Mate Fireman Apprentice R_ (Applicant) has been to CO’s NJP on two separate occasions where he plead guilty to dereliction of duty, unauthorized absence and violation or failure to obey other lawful written order.  Machinist’s Mate Fireman Apprentice R_ (Applicant) has also been to SCM where he plead guilty to four specifications of unauthorized absence.  On 13 February 2004, Machinist’s Mate Fireman Apprentice R_ (Applicant) submitted a request for a conditional waiver for a General (Under Honorable Conditions) in lieu of electing an administrative board. Machinist’s Mate Fireman Apprentice R_ (Applicant)has had ample opportunity to correct his deficiencies; however, he continually fails to follow Navy rules and regulations.  After careful consideration of enclosure (1) through (9), I recommend a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge.”

040309:	COMNAVAIRLANT NORFOLK, VA directed the Applicant's discharge with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct commission of a serious offense.

	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 20040324 by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (A and B) with a service characterization of general (under honorable conditions.  After a thorough review of the available 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 NDRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge, is authorized to change the character of service and/or the reason for discharge if such change is warranted.  There is no evidence of impropriety or inequity in the Applicant’s discharge.  The Applicant’s misconduct is clearly documented.  Therefore, relief is 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.  A general 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 2 nonjudicial punishment proceedings for violations of Articles 86 (UA) and 92 (dereliction of duty).  Violations of UCMJ Article 92 are considered serious offenses.   Also, the Applicant received a retention warning and he was found guilty by a summary court-martial of violations of UCMJ Article 86, 4 specifications of UA.    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.

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 additional evidence related to this discharge.  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), re-issued October 2002, effective 22 Aug 02 until 25 April 2005, Article 1910-142 [formerly 3630605], SEPARATION BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT - COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE.

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, dereliction 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