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

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

  ex-SR, USN
Docket No. ND05-00567

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20050210.  The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to entry level separation or uncharacterized.  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 20050915.  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 and reason for discharge shall not change.  The discharge shall remain General (Under Honorable Conditions) by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application and letter:

“I think that the discharge I received was improper because the reasons for my actions was first when I went on leave and I came back late was because I couldn’t get a ticket to be back on the day I was suppose to be back and I told my command what was going on but I still got put on restriction for 15 days and that was finished.

Second When I had missed my class was because me and my wife at the time were argueing because she wanted me out of the military.

There are a lot of things that I went through with my wife at the time I was in the military and I told my chain of Command what was going on and I even told my Captain and he told me that he was willing to work with me and send us to counseling but I was very emotional and confused because she was telling that if didn’t get out She was going to make sure I pay if I didn’t She told me that She would make sure my daughter hated me and she would do something So I wouldn’t have a choice but to get out.  But I realized I made a huge mistake but I thought I would be saving my Family and marriage But promise that If I am able to get back in I will do what ever it takes to serve my country and nothing would stop me.  Please I am asking to reconsider my request and give me another chance to do right.  What I am requesting to for is re entry Code be upgraded to a 3, 2, 1

Thank you and God Bless

Well I have been working at Wal-Mart for Now.  But I haven’t went to school but I been considering school if I can’t get back in the military.”

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)	20030530 - 20030610	COG
	Active:    None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  20030611		Date of Discharge:  20040521

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    00  11  11  (Does not exclude lost time)
	Inactive:  None

Time Lost During This Period (days):

	Unauthorized absence:	1 day
	Confinement:			None

Age at Entry:  22

Years Contracted:  4 

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  36

Highest Rate:  SR

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  1.00 (1)		Behavior:  1.00 (1) 			OTA:  1.00 

Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, (as listed on the DD Form 214):  National Defense Service Medal

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: 

040104:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86:  Absent from unit.
Award:  Forfeiture of $600.00 pay per month for 1 month (suspended 1 month).  Restriction and extra duty for 15 days.  No indication of appeal in the record.

040104:	Retention Warning:  Advised of deficiency (Violation of UCMJ Article 86-absent from unit.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.
	Applicant did not wish to make a statement.

040121:	Medical evaluation by USS DENVER Medical Department:  23 year old black male with 8 months active duty presents to medical with complains of problems with Chain of Command.  Chain of Command feels patient is not in control of his anger sighting “Temper Tantrums” & “Problems with authority” which the patient endorses.  Patient feels he is “automatically wrong” in any confrontation with Chain of Command.  Feels he is in a subordinate position to people who are less qualified.  No history of cruelty.  No history of self-mutilation, no history of suicidal ideations, no history of homicidal ideations.  Endorses “feeling empty.”
	Assessment:  Patient not a danger to self or others.  Patient understands he is responsible for his actions.
	Plan:
AXIS I:  None V. Adjustment disorder
	AXIS II:  Developing – Cluster “B” traits ranging to Pathologic Narcissism/Anti-Social/ Borderline anger management / Interpersonal skills lacking
	AXIS III:  None
	AXIS IV:  Poor 
	AXIS V:  Max 75%
		    Min 50%
		    Current 60-67%

040428:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86:  Failure to go to appointed place of duty.
	Award:  Restriction and extra duty for 30 days.  No indication of appeal in the record.

040521:	DD Form 214:  Applicant discharged with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct due to a 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 20040521 by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct (A) 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 (B and C).  The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (D).

Normally, to permit relief, an impropriety or inequity must have existed during the period of enlistment in question.  No such impropriety or inequity is evident during the Applicant’s enlistment.  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 for behavior not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge.  The Applicant was awarded nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on 20040104 for a violation of UCMJ Article 86, unauthorized absence.  Subsequent to this NJP, the Applicant was administratively warned by issuance of a NAVPERS 1070/613 Counseling/Retention warning that further misconduct could result in administrative separation.  On 20040428, the Applicant was awarded a second NJP for another violation of UCMJ Article 86, unauthorized absence.  Under applicable regulations, the Applicant’s misconduct constituted a pattern of misconduct.  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.  Such conduct falls far short of that expected of a member of the U.S. military and does not meet the requirements for an upgrade of his characterization of service.  Relief is not warranted.

The Applicant contends his disciplinary problems were the result of stress caused by his failing marriage.  The NDRB recognizes that serving in the U.S. Navy is challenging.  Our country is fortunate to have men and women willing to endure the hardships and sacrifices required in order to serve their country.  It must be noted that many servicemembers face hardships similar to those of the Applicant.  It must further be noted that most members of the Navy still serve honorably despite their hardships and therefore earn their honorable discharges.  In fairness to those members of the Navy, commanders and separation authorities are tasked to ensure that undeserving Sailors receive no higher characterization than is due.  The NDRB found that the Applicant's service was equitably characterized.  Relief denied.

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 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.  As of this time, the Applicant has not provided any post-service documentation for the Board to consider.  Relief denied.

Since the NDRB has no jurisdiction over reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Navy, Marine Corps, or any other of the Armed Forces, NDRB is not authorized to change a reenlistment code.  An unfavorable “RE” code is, in itself, not a bar to reenlistment.  A request for a waiver can be submitted during the processing of a formal application for reenlistment through a recruiter.  Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) can make changes to reenlistment codes.

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 other evidence related to his discharge 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), re-issued October 2002, effective 22 Aug 2002 until Present, Article 1910-140 (formerly 3630600), SEPARATION BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT - PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT.

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, AUTHORITY/POLICY FOR DEPARTMENTAL DISCHARGE REVIEW.

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