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

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

 ex-ETSN, USN
Docket No. ND06-00895

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20060620.  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 20070405.  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 due to a pattern of misconduct.

PART I - ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION
Applicant Issues

The Applicant is requesting an upgrade because he felt his discharge was inequitable because the punishment did not fit the crime.

The Applicant claims it was his first time missing the ship curfew.

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)	20000330 - 20000530	COG
	Active:    None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  20000531		Date of Discharge:  20040617

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    04  00  16  
	Inactive:  None

Time Lost During This Period (days):

	Unauthorized absence:  None
	Confinement:		  None

Age at Entry:  23

Years Contracted:  4 (24-month extension)

Education Level:  16				AFQT:  98

Highest Rate:  ET3

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  3.0 (6) 		Behavior:  2.3 (6)			OTA:  2.96 

Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, (as listed on the DD Form 214):  Navy Battle “E”, Sea Service Deployment Ribbon, Navy and Marine Corps Overseas Ribbon (2), Meritorious Unit Commendation (1)

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

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

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events: 

030313:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86:  Absence without leave.
	Violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Dereliction of duty on 030313.
	Award:  Forfeiture of $200.00 for 1 month, restriction for 30 days, reduction to E-3 (suspended for 6 months).  No indication of appeal in the record.

Undated:	Reduction in pay grade awarded at NJP on 030313 vacated due to continued misconduct.

030313:	Retention Warning:  Advised of deficiency (Violation of UCMJ Article 86 (Absence without leave), Article 92 (Dereliction of duty)), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

030904:	Commanding Officer’s NJP.

Undated:	Commanding Officer’s NJP.

040617:	DD Form 214: Applicant discharged with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct pattern of misconduct.  

Service Record did not contain the Administrative Discharge package.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 20040617 by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct (A and B) 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 (C and D).  The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (E).

The Applicant is requesting an upgrade because he felt his discharge was inequitable because the punishment did not fit the crime.  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 one retention warning, a nonjudicial punishment proceeding for violations of Articles 86 (Unauthorized absence) and 92 (Dereliction in the performance of duties) of the UCMJ, and 2 nonjudicial punishment proceedings for subsequent offenses of the UCMJ.  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.

For the edification of the Applicant, although the administrative separation package was missing, the government presumes regularity in the conduct of government affairs.  The board found nothing in the record that demonstrated any inequity or impropriety in government policy or procedure in this case.  The Applicant’s uncorroborated assertions do not overcome the presumption of regularity.
  
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 2002 until 25 April 2005, 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 (Dereliction in the performance of duties).

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 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