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

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

ex-LTJG, USNR
Docket No. ND06-00649

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20060216.  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 20070208.  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 General (Under Honorable Conditions) by reason of misconduct (other).

PART I - ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Decisional Issues

	Propriety: No Board of Inquiry

	Equity: Isolated incident

Documentation

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

Applicant’s DD Form 214 (Member 4)

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	19980909 - 19981206	COG
	Active:   USN	19981207 - 20011011	HON

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Commission:  20011012		Date of Discharge:  20050603

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    03  07  23
	Inactive:  None

Time Lost During This Period (days):

	Unauthorized absence:  None
	Confinement:		  None

Age at Commission:  28

Type of Commission:  Reserve

Education Level:  16				Degree:  Bachelor of Arts

Highest Grade:  LTJG 

The Officer’s Fitness Reports were available to the Board for review.

Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, (as listed on the DD Form 214):  Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal, Sea Service Deployment Ribbon, Enlisted Surface Warfare Insignia, Enlisted Aviation Insignia, National Defense Service Medal.

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

GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/MISCONDUCT (OTHER), authority:  SECNAVINST 1920.6B.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events: 

011012:	Applicant accepted permanent appointment.

041123:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 134 (2 specs):
	Specification 1: On diver occasions, between 24 and 26 October 2004, wrongfully have sexual intercourse with A_ M_, a married woman, not his wife.
	Specification 2: On or about 041022, knowingly fraternize with ACAN R_ M_, an enlisted person, on term of military equality, to wit: by inviting ACAN M_ to his home and allowing ACAN M_ to drink alcohol there, in violation of the custom of the Naval Service of the United States that officers shall not fraternize with enlisted persons on terms of military equality.
	Award:  Oral admonition.  Applicant did not intend to and decline to appeal the imposition of NJP.

041130:	Commander, Training Air Wing TWO, Kingsville, TX, based on non-judicial punishment, recommended separation with a service characterization of General (Under Honorable Conditions).

041207:	Chief of Naval Air Training, Corpus Christi, TX, forwarded, concurring with the recommendation that the Applicant be separated.   Applicant is a probationary officer; accordingly, recommend the use of notification procedures to effect the member’s expeditious separation.

050314:	Applicant notified of the initiation of administrative separation proceedings.  [Extracted from CNP ltr dtd 050318.]

050317:	Applicant acknowledgment of rights and statement.  [Extracted from CNP ltr dtd 050318.]

050518:	Chief of Naval Personnel recommended to the Secretary of the Navy that the Applicant be separated with an Honorable discharge, separation code JKM (misconduct).

050520:	Assistant Secretary of the Navy (Manpower and Reserve Affairs) directed the Applicant’s discharge with a service characterization of General (Under Honorable Conditions) by reason of misconduct.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 20050603 by reason of misconduct (other).  (A) with a service characterization of general (under 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 (B and C).  The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (D).

Propriety – No Board of Inquiry: The Applicant contends that he requested an Administrative Discharge Board of Inquiry but did not get one.  At the time the Applicant was considered for separation, he was a probationary officer.  A probationary officer is a Regular or Reserve commissioned officer on the active duty list with less than 5 years of active commissioned service.  According to reference (A), a probationary commissioned officer being considered for separation shall be processed for separation under the notification procedures.  Neither a hearing nor a board proceeding is required.  Consequently, the Applicant was not offered a BOI to show cause for retention.  The Board concluded that the Applicant discharge was proper.  Relief denied.

Equity – Isolated incident: The Applicant also contends that his misconduct was one isolated incident in 6.5 years of service.  Applicable regulations require that a member’s characterization of service be based upon the member’s total performance of duty and conduct during the current enlistment.  However, there are circumstances where conduct or performance of duty reflected by a single adverse incident may form the basis of characterization for a Sailor’s overall service.  The incident need not result in formal punishment to be properly used to characterize a Sailor’s service.  The Applicant’s records contain nonjudicial punishment proceedings on 20041123 for violation of UCMJ Article 134 (2 specifications) Adultery and Fraternization.  These violations are serious offenses for which a punitive discharge is authorized under Appendix 12 of the Manual for Courts-Martial and typically warrants a characterization of service as under other than honorable conditions.  The Applicant was properly notified, processed and discharged with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct.  Based upon available records, nothing indicates that the Applicant’s discharge was in any way inconsistent with the standards of discipline in the U.S. Navy.  Therefore, the Board concluded that the Applicant’s discharge was equitable as issued.  Relief denied.

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 post-service accomplishments or any other evidence related to the discharge at that time.  Representation at a personal appearance hearing is recommended but not required.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 1920.6B (ADMINISTRATIVE SEPARATION OF OFFICERS), effective 13 December 1999 until 14 December 2005 establishes policies, standards and procedures for the administrative separation of Navy and Marine Corps officers from the naval service in accordance with Title 10, United States Code and DoD Directive 1332.30 of 14 March 1997.

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

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

D.  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 Instruction 1332.28, you may submit a complaint in accordance with Enclosure (5) of that Instruction.  You should read Enclosure (5) of the Instruction 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 Instruction 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