Author: CAP
Last saved by: Department of the Navy
Company: NCPB

Docket No. ND02-00829

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

ex-SN, USN
Docket No. ND02-00829

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 020322, 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 030221.  After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, NDRB discerned no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the Applicant’s service.  The Board’s vote was unanimous that the character of the discharge shall not change.  The discharge shall remain: UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-140 (formerly 3630600).

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as submitted

1.  My discharge was improper due to the fact that to my knowledge I did not take any drugs.  The only possibility I could think of was that someone slipped me something while I was in Tijuana Mexico.  My Captain though did not care what I said.  I was going to ask for a hearing but the ship's yeoman convinced me it would only make things worse, do I accepted Captains Mast.  Which I now see was a mistake.

Documentation

In addition to the service record (there was NO DISCHARGE PACKAGE AVAILABLE), the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:

Copy of DD Form 214
Employment Reference Letter and Business Card from E_ T_, Manager, Speed-O-Tach, Inc
Registration Statement from Contra Costa Community College District

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	981121 - 990119	COG
	Active:  USN 			None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  990120		Date of Discharge:  001023

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    01  09  04
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  19			Years Contracted:  4 (24 months extension)

Education Level:  09			AFQT:  30

Highest Rate:  ET3

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  2.50 (2)	Behavior:  2.00 (2)		OTA:  2.50 (5.0 Evals)

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  GCA

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None

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

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

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

000120:	Absent from appointed place of duty on 000120, to wit: 0730 muster, Electronic Training Department, FTC, San Diego, CA, returned at 0750 000120.  Retained onboard for disciplinary action.

000127:	Retention Warning:  Advised of deficiency (Violation of the UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence and Article 134: Drunkenness-Incapacitated for performance of duties through prior wrongful indulgence in intoxicating liquor and Underage drinking (2 specifications)), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning. 

000920:	COMPHIBGRU THREE authorized 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 001023 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 Board’s charter limits its review to a determination on the propriety and equity of the discharge.  In the Applicant’s case the Board could discern no impropriety or inequity and therefore considered the Applicant’s discharge was proper and equitable. Normally, to permit relief, an error or inequity must have existed during the period of enlistment in question.  No such error or inequity is evident during the Applicant’s enlistment.  Additionally, 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 civilian life, subsequent to leaving the service.  Relief not warranted.

The Applicant 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.  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.  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

The remaining portion of this document is divided into 4 Parts: Part I - Applicant’s Issues and Documentation, Part II - Summary of Service, Part III – Rationale for Decision and Pertinent Regulation/Law, Part IV - Information for the Applicant.
INDEX:  A6710/A9319/A9217/A9221