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

 
 ex-ACAA, USN
Docket No. ND03-00717

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20030319.  The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable.  The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review.  The Applicant listed County of San Diego, Veteran Affairs as the representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20040212.  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)/MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910 - 142 (formerly 3630605).

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

1.  “To Whom It May Concern:

My name is D_ A_ C_ (Applicant) and I am a disabled veteran of the U.S. Armed Forces. I am writing the review board because of the general discharge I received on December 6, 1999. I received this discharge because of my inability to conform with traditional military standards, but there were also personal hardships that contributed to my unwarranted performance.
I wanted to join the military because I thought it would be a excellent experience for me because I did not have a definite career objective. Eight months before leaving for boot camp, I experienced the death of my little brother, and that effected my life more than words can say. I believe it also affected the way I communicated with my superiors, especially when I was stationed on the USS John C. Stennis.
Life on the ship, for E-3 and below is difficult, especially when you are on your first six month cruise of the gulf.  There were many times my supervisors took their frustrations out on me, and the trickle down effect became a nightmare. With few friends and even less people to relate to, I became a volatile bottle of frustration ready to explode. Many of the situations I found myself getting into, including confrontations with supervisors, was a direct result of the stressful environment we all were in, and my immaturity as a young man in the military.
I had a long time to think about my life after the military. I went to my home to North Carolina, and quickly went to the workforce. There were some opportunities that I could not capitalize on because of my general discharge. I decided that the best way for me to reach the level of success I hoped for, was to go off to college, so I saved money and moved to California where I began to attend MiraCosta College.
It has been almost four years since I have been out the military, and a lot of my views have changed for the better. In college, it was the military, which helped me get into the program provided by the V.A. called Vocational Rehabilitation. This program has been such a blessing because it has enabled me to be successful in college, and graduate from MiraCosta College in May 2003. I still can receive essential benefits like V.A. healthcare, and the V.A. home loan. The V.A. has been priceless in their efforts to advance my education by buying me a computer for my classes in web design.
I can honestly say, now, that if it was not for the military, I don’t know where I would be. It would be an honor for me to have the discharge overturned to honorable because the military has done so much for my life. I have hopes of continuing my education, and programs like the GI bill would be essential in helping me achieve my aspirations. I have matured greatly since my years as a sailor, and I plead that you don’t hold my past against me, and allow me a chance to achieve the success I dream of. I sincerely appreciate all the help the military has given me, and look forward to your continual help on my quest to become a great leader.
Thank You
D_ A_ C_”

Documentation

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

Letter of acknowledgement, dated April 18, 2002
Character reference, undated
Letter of recommendation, dated February 13, 2003
Unofficial Credit Transcript, Transcript Results, dated February 11, 2003 (3 pages)
Applicant’s DD Form 214

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive: USNR (DEP)	970125 - 970225	COG
	Active:   None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  970226		Date of Discharge:  991205

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    02  09  10
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  18			Years Contracted:  4

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  41/52

Highest Rate:  AC3

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  2.00 (3)	Behavior:  1.67 (3)		OTA:  2.22

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  SSDR, AFEM, NUC, NER

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None

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

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

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

970226:	You are being retained in the Naval service, despite your fraudulent induction as evidenced by your failure to disclose required basic enlistment eligibility information.  This decision is based on the information you provided the Recruit Quality Assurance Interviewer and if it is found that additional information has not been disclosed, this waiver is void and you could be subject to other judicial or administrative proceedings.  Marijuana 4X 11/96-1/97.  A program waiver for marijuana usage has been granted on 970227 for enlistment in AC program.

990408:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Leaving appointed place of duty on 990321, to wit: USS JOHN C. STENNIS (CVN 74).
	Award: Restriction and extra duty for 15 days, reduction to ACAA.  No indication of appeal in the record.

990412:	Retention Warning:  Advised of deficiency (Leaving you appointed place of duty.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning. 
	
990525:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence from appointed place of duty for 59 minutes, violation of UCMJ Article 92: Disobey a written order by sleeping in a rack/berthing to which not assigned.
	Award: Revoke previously suspended reduction in rate (Frocked E-4 reduced to E-3 (ACAN), restriction and extra duty for 30 days.  No indication of appeal in the record.

991121:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Failure to obey a lawful order.
	Award:  Restriction and extra duty for 30 days, reduction to ACAA.  No indication of appeal in the record.

991203:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge general (under honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.

991203:	Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights.

000126:	Commanding Officer directed general (under honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 19991205 general (under honorable conditions) for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (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 Applicant’s service record was marred by award of three non-judicial punishments for leaving appointed place of duty, and failure to obey a lawful order.  An upgrade of the Applicant's discharge to an honorable characterization is not warranted.  Relief denied.  Additionally, the Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of  educational opportunities as requested in the issue.  Regulations limit the Board’s review to a determination on the propriety and equity of the discharge.  Relief denied.

The following is provided for the edification of the Applicant.  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 naval service.  The NDRB is authorized, however, to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge to the extent such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review.  Examples of documentation that should be provided to the Board include proof of educational pursuits, verifiable employment records, documentation of community service, and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities.

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 additional documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments 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 97 until 29 March 2000, Article 1910-142  [formerly 3630605]. SEPARATION BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT- COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE.

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