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

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

  ex-HA, USN
Docket No. ND05-01258

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20050720.  The Applicant requested a documentary discharge review and that his characterization of service be changed to honorable.  The Applicant did not designate a representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20060406.  After a thorough review of all available 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 characterization 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 - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION
Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

“I requested for MGI Bill Benefits, and I was told my discharge wasn’t good enough.”

Documentation

The Applicant did not provide additional documentation for the Board’s consideration, only the service and medical records were reviewed.  

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive:  USNR (DEP)	19981219 – 19990711		COG
	Active:    None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  19990712		Date of Discharge:  20030124

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    03 06 13  
	Inactive:  None

Time Lost During This Period (days):

	Unauthorized absence:  none
	Confinement:		  none

Age at Entry:  18 

Years Contracted:  4 (12 month extension)

Education Level:  12				AFQT:  70

Highest Rate:  HN

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  3.0 (1) 		Behavior:  3.0 (1) 		OTA:  3.17 (1)

Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, (as listed on the DD Form 214):  Navy and Marine Corps Overseas Service Ribbon, 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: 

001214:	NJP for a violation of the UCMJ, Article 92 (failure to obey order or regulation, on 001124).
	Award:  Extra duty for 30 days, reduction to next inferior pay grade (suspended for 6 months).  No indication of appeal in the record.

001215:	Retention Warning:  Advised of deficiency (failure to obey order or regulation.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

020808:	Retention Warning:  Advised of deficiencies (unauthorized absence, failure to obey a direct order), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

020808:	NJP for violations of the UCMJ, Article 86 (unauthorized absence) and Article 92 (failure to obey an order, on 020730).
	Award:  45 days restriction, 45 days extra duty, and reduction to E-2.  Punishments suspended for 6 months.  No indication of appeal in the record.

021021:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with the least favorable characterization of service as general (under honorable conditions) due to a pattern of misconduct.

021022:	The Applicant elected not to consult with counsel.  He did elect to submit a written statement for consideration by the separation authority and the right to obtain copies of the documents used to support the basis for the separation.

021022:	Commanding Officer, U.S. Naval Hospital, Yokosuka, Japan recommended to Commander, Naval Personnel the discharge of HA T_ (Applicant) with a general (under honorable conditions) due to a pattern of misconduct.  This letter lists as enclosure six, “vacation letter dated 24 September 2002”.

021028:	COMNAVPERS to NAVHOSP Yokosuka, Japan, reference letter of 021022.  Retention of HAT_ (Applicant), no further adsep action is contemplated because member did not violate pg 13 warning of 020808.    

030109:	CNPC directed the Applicant's discharge with a general (under honorable conditions) due to a pattern of misconduct.  Message specifically canceled retention message of 021028.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 20030124 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 all available records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper and equitable (B and C).  

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 (under honorable conditions) discharge is warranted when significant negative aspects of a member's conduct outweigh the positive aspects of the member's military record.  The Applicant’s service was marred by two nonjudicial punishments for violations of UCMJ Article 86 (unauthorized absence) and Article 92 (disobey an order or regulation, 2 specifications).  The reason for the Applicant’s discharge, a pattern of misconduct, is defined by reference (A) as two or more nonjudicial punishments during a single enlistment.  There is credible evidence in the record that the Applicant was guilty of multiple infractions of the UCMJ.  The evidence of record does not demonstrate that the Applicant was not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions.  Separation under these conditions generally results in a service characterization of less than honorable.  Relief denied.

The Applicant requested his G.I. Bill benefits.  There is no requirement or law that grants recharacterization based upon the issue of obtaining Veterans' benefits.  Additionally, the Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the purpose of enhancing medical, housing, employment or educational opportunities.  This issue does not serve to provide a foundation upon which the Board can grant relief.  Regulations limit the Board’s review to a determination on the propriety and equity of the discharge.  Relief not warranted.  

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, 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 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