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

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

 ex-SA, USN
Docket No. ND05-01006

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20050601.  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.  Subsequent to the application, the applicant obtained representation by American Legion. 

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20060119.  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 commission of a serious offense.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the attached document/letter: 

“To Whom It May Concern:

I am C_ B_ (Applicant).  In the past, I’ve made decisions that negatively affected final outcomes involving future possibilities.  The reason I have composed this letter is because of my inability to travel in route to Washington and present my reasoning of rank in person.  I am requesting a military review to change my military re-enlistment code from General Under Honorable Conditions to Honorable Conditions.

Previously at 19 years old in 1996, I enlisted in the U.S. Navy then not realizing the excellent future at hand.  Then in the Navy, I began to deform my own views of the military lifestyle without even “sea legs.” First, being an immature irrational individual, I was involved with alcoholic beverages while on watch.  The first disciplinary action I received was restriction for 15 days.  The next alcoholic incident resulted in a 45-day restriction.  After those immature acts, I unwisely questioned myself how valuable the Navy was to me.  With only these items, they were motivation for me to distance myself from military life.  My decision evolved to a plan, which granted separation.  That plan was to pour water into my rack whilst my shipmates slept.  This event made the loyal shipmates I shared barrack’s with believe I urinated myself during the night upon awakening the next morning.  Summarily from my actions, I had shipmates document that these episodes happened.  Up until now, this is my worst decision.  I have no physically inhibiting bladder control problem.  In reality, I do not remember the last time I urinated in any bed, meaning, this classification does not apply to me and must be corrected.  As a result, in current military records, I keep in mind my previous error within involving myself as a juvenile would.  This prevalence in memory will never allow my resurgence, unless respectful repayment of my military dues is allowable.

Back in 1997, after the military discharge, I gained a temporary employment position with the U.S.  Postal Service.  I then bombarded myself with flashbacks of how life could have differed if my military enlistment was still current.  With this I attempted to regain my personal pre-determined rank of self-worth, so I enrolled into Lamar University Institute of Technology in January 1999.  I graduated from Lamar in December 2000 with an Associate of Applied Science.  in Computer Networking and Troubleshooting Technology.  Subsequent to this, my past civilian plummeted to Class C Misdemeanor deferred adjudication probation, but dismissal of the charge upon successful completion of the probation.  This completion voyage began back in September 2002 and pushed through September 2003.  As stated, my civilian life has not equaled up to my prior military status, but I will continue the strife for success.

At this moment, I am 28 years of age and currently enrolled in Lamar University to attain the Bachelor of Science in Industrial Technology while only 37 credits remain.  (I am on the verge of an education major, but that is another account in itself) Anyhow, this equates to one and a half-years of college before completion.  Currently in my career employment, I treat dirty water.  I am a full-time wastewater operator at Cintas-The Uniform People and I have retained this position for two years, while moving forward.  With education and a career, they coincide with personal needs to re-enlist in the military and serve my country.  Speaking of the undergraduate bachelor degree, this college graduation will initiate a teaching career opportunity for me.  In few words, this could conceptually parallel military duty.  When speaking of further education, my objective is to achieve a Master of Arts in Education/Administration and Supervision, which in reality allows the pursuit of high school counseling or principal With not only educational guidance, this aim will also secure my family as well as financial stability.  This result can take place simultaneously if teaching while serving military reservist.  Four years ago, I met a brilliant, family oriented woman.  This woman tied directly into my view of quality.  She has a Bachelor of Business Administration in Management Information-Systems and I am jokingly jealous.  We were married on May 24th, 2005, my birthday.  Currently we are involved with building a family together.  She is now five months pregnant with our first girl.  Of course, our family knows she will become “daddy’s little girl.” It is spectacular to my wife and I.

With this, men attempt ownership of personal, predetermined rank of success or prosperity, while learning from mistakes.  Similar to previously mentioned, for seven years I have reflected on how my life would have best fitted within the military.  To this date, I value the dog tag I keep on my key chain.  Also to the day, I have retained my military I.D., which reminds me of my past failure and motivates my drive to reclaim honorability.  These items symbolize how much attention and reflection I have devoted to this particular statement of truth.  Concerning helping people, I believe my corrected views will steer our youthful American’s into positive adults.  Honestly, even if this expression of personal belief does not grant my re-enlistment code change to honorable conditions, I shall still guide our youth with encouragement and testimony.  As time reveals everything, I shall still live through God and America.  I am attempting to accomplish personal, pre-determined rank”.

Yours in solidarity,

[signed]
C_ P. B_ [applicant]

Representative submitted no issues.

Documentation

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

Applicant’s DD Form 214 (2)
Document Summary
Service Related Documents (11 pgs)
Reference ltr from Mrs. D_ T. G_, dtd February 20, 2005
Reference ltr from Ms C_ R. W_, dtd March 20, 2005
Reference ltr from W_ H_, dtd April 5, 2005
Unofficial Transcript from Lamar University (3 pages)

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive:  USNR (DEP)	19960413 – 19960804		COG
	Active:    None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  19960805		Date of Discharge:  19970725

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    00  11  21  
	Inactive:  None

Time Lost During This Period (days):

	Unauthorized absence:	None
	Confinement:			None

Age at Entry:  19 

Years Contracted:  4 

Education Level:  12				AFQT:  67

Highest Rate:  SA

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

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

Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, (as listed on the DD Form 214):  None.

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

GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/MISCONDUCT, authority:  MILPERSMAN, Article 3630605.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events: 

970203:	Medical evaluation by ARD, NAVHOSP, GLAKES.
	Impression:  Patient does not appear to be dependent at this time but could become so, if his behavior continues.  It seems patient abuses ETOH regularly, but avoids trouble, until now. 
	Recommendation:  Level II treatment at ARD, NAVHOSP, GLAKES.

970213:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92:  (2 spec) Underage drinking.
Spec 1: In that Seaman Recruit C_ P. B_, U.S. Navy, Service School Command, Great Lakes, Illinois on active duty, did, on 1 February 1997, fail to obey a lawful order by wrongfully consuming an alcoholic beverage while under the age of twenty-one.
Spec 2:  In that Seaman Recruit C_ P. B_, U.S. Navy, Service School Command, Great Lakes, Illinois on active duty, did, on 1 February 1997, fail to obey a lawful order by wrongfully possessing an alcoholic beverage in the BEQ.
Award:  Forfeiture of $210 per month for 1 month, restriction and extra duty for 14 days.  No indication of appeal in the record.

970213:	Retention Warning:  Advised of deficiency (Violation UCMJ Article 92 x 2 (underage drinking).), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

970521:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92:  Underage drinking.
Spec: In that Seaman Recruit C_ P. B_, U.S. Navy, Service School Command, Great Lakes, Illinois on active duty, did, on 24 April 1997, fail to obey a lawful order by wrongfully consuming an alcoholic beverage while under the age of twenty-one.
Violation of UCMJ, Article 112:  Drunk on duty.
Spec: In that Seaman Recruit C_ P. B_, U.S. Navy, Service School Command, Great Lakes, Illinois on active duty, did, on 24 April 1997 found drunk while on duty as a member of the duty section.
	Award:  Forfeiture of $450 per month for 2 months, restriction for 30 days.   No indication of appeal in the record.

970523:	Branch Medical Clinic:  Applicant diagnosed with enuresis.  Applicant instructed to follow-up with civilian provider.

970611:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge by reason of convenience of the government on the basis of other designated physical conditions and misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.  Applicant notified that the least favorable characterization of service possible is general (under honorable conditions).

970611:	Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult with counsel, elected to waive all rights except the right to obtain copies of the documents used to support the basis for the separation.

970620:	Commanding Officer, Service School Command, Great Lakes, directed discharge with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of convenience of the government on the basis of other designated physical conditions, misconduct due to commission of a serious offense and misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.  Commanding Officer’s comments:  “Enclosures (1) through (5) supports subjects administrative separation.  SR B_’s (Applicant) misconduct is summarized above.  His conduct is not compatible with the standards demanded by the naval service.  On 23 May 1997, SR B_ (Applicant) was diagnosed as having enuresis which was determined to have existed prior to enlistment.  As a result of the above evaluation I concur with the psychologist’s recommendation that SR B_’s (Applicant) condition is likely to interfere with the performance of his military duties.  I consider him to have no further potential for naval service and pursuant to reference (a) I direct that Personnel Support Activity Detachment, Great Lakes, separate SR B_ (Applicant) from the naval service with a discharge characterization as General Under Honorable conditions.”

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 19970725 by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (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).  

By regulation, a discharge shall be deemed proper, unless it is determined that an error of fact, law, procedure, or discretion has substantially prejudiced the rights of the Applicant.  The Applicant was discharged with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.  A review of the Applicant’s service record convinced the Board that a preponderance of evidence exists to support the Applicant’s basis for separation by virtue of his two NJPs for violations of UCMJ Articles 92 and 112 for underage drinking and being drunk on duty.  The record further reveals that the Applicant was properly processed and notified for separation by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense on 19970611 with a least favorable characterization of general (under honorable conditions).  On the same day, the Applicant waived all rights except for the right to obtain copies of the documents used to support the basis for separation.  On 19970620, the Commanding Officer, Service School Command, Great Lakes, directed that the Applicant be discharged with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.  Based upon the above review, the Board unanimously concluded that the Applicant’s discharge processing was in substantial compliance with applicable statutes, rules, and regulations.  Despite the Applicant’s contentions, the Board could find no error of fact, law, procedure, or discretion that might afford the Applicant relief.  Thus, the Board concluded that relief is not warranted.

Regulations require that a Sailor’s characterization of service be based upon the member’s total performance of duty and conduct during the current enlistment.  Furthermore, 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.  When the service of a member of the U.S. Navy has met the standard for acceptable conduct and performance, it is appropriate to characterize that service as honorable.  A general (under honorable conditions) 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 two nonjudicial punishment proceedings for violations of UCMJ Articles 92 and 112 and one NAVPERS 1070/613 retention warning.  The Applicant’s misconduct reflects his failure to meet the minimum standards required for an honorable discharge.  The Board concluded that relief is not warranted.

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 could 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 Board received and considered all of the Applicant’s submissions, including his Lamar University transcripts, his letters of recommendation, and his service related documents.  After careful consideration, the Board concluded the Applicant’s post-service achievements have been insufficient to mitigate his misconduct while in the Naval service.  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 any additional 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), Change 14, effective 
03 Oct 96 until 971212, Article 3630605, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT – COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE.

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, failure to obey order or regulation or Article 112, drunk on duty.

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.

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