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

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

  ex-AGAN, USN
Docket No. ND05-01361

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20050818.  The Applicant requests the Narrative Reason for Separation be changed to “Early Out or ADMIN SEP.”  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 20060420.  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 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 application: 

“At this time I would like to request that the narrative reason be changed to reflect that I was an administrative separation from the navy.”

Documentation

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

Applicant’s DD Form 214

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive:  USNR (DEP)	19900817 – 19910814		COG
	Active:    USN			19910815 – 19950813		HON

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  19950814			Date of Discharge:  19960503

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    00  08  19  
	Inactive:  None

Time Lost During This Period (days):  

	Unauthorized absence:  none
	Confinement:		  none

Age at Entry:  22 

Years Contracted:  5 

Education Level:  12				AFQT:  80

Highest Rate:  AG2

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  2.0 (1) 		Behavior:  1.0 (1) 		OTA:  1.86 

Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, (as listed on the DD Form 214):  National Defense Service Medal, Sea Service Deployment Ribbon, Meritorious Unit Commendation, First Good Conduct Award.

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

GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/MISCONDUCT, authority:  MILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events: 

950814:	Reenlisted this date for a term of 5 years.

951005:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Failure to obey order or regulation, in that Aerographer’s Mate Second Class D_ D. B_, USN, on active duty, did, at Naval Atlantic Meteorology and Oceanography Center, Naval Base, Norfolk, Virginia, on or about 950925 fail to obey a lawful General Regulation to wit: Chapter 11, section 4, subparagraph 1145, U.S. Navy Regulations dated 1990, by wrongfully reproducing examination sheets of the “Introduction to Forecasting” test.
	Award:  Reduction to E-4 (suspended for 4 months).  No indication of appeal in the record.

951106:	Commanding Officer, Naval Atlantic Meteorology and Oceanography Center notifies the Applicant that his access to classified information is suspended, effective immediately.

960104:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 121:  Larceny (Shoplifting), in that Aerographer’s Mate Second Class D_ D. B_, USN, on active duty, did, at Marine Corps Exchange, Marine Corps Base, Quantico, Virginia, on or about 951030, steal a CD organizer, to wit: Aerographer’s Mate Second Class B_ switched the $12.99 price tag for a $ 22.99 on a CD organizer, paid $12.99 for the organizer, and attempt to exit the Marine Corps Exchange.
	Award:  Commanding Officer vacated previous reduction.  Reduction to Next Inferior Pay Grade.  Restriction to barracks for 60 days which was suspended for 4 months.  No indication of appeal in the record.

960117:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense as evidenced by all punishments under the UCMJ in your current enlistment.

960214:	Applicant advised of rights and having consulted with counsel, elected to appear before an Administrative Discharge Board.

960222:	Applicant to unauthorized absence at 0715 on 960222.

960223:	Applicant from unauthorized absence at 0700 on 960223 (23 hours and 45 minutes/surrendered).

960322:	An Administrative Discharge Board, based upon a preponderance of the evidence and by unanimous vote, found that the Applicant had committed misconduct due to commission of a serious offense, that such misconduct warranted separation, and recommended discharge with a under honorable conditions (general) and transfer to the Individual Ready Reserves (IRR). 

960419:	Commanding Officer, Naval Atlantic Meteorology and Oceanography Center recommended discharge with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.  Commanding Officer’s comments:  “I concur with the findings of the Board with the following exception: I do not recommend allowing AGAN (SW) B_ (Applicant) transfer to the IRR.  This is inconsistent with misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.”

960510:	BUPERS directed the Applicant's discharge with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct commission of a serious offense.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 19960503 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).  

The NDRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an Applicant's discharge, will change the reason for discharge if such a change is warranted.  The summary of service clearly documents that misconduct by commission of a serious offense(s) was the reason the Applicant was discharged.  The Applicant’s service was marred by 2 nonjudicial punishment proceedings for violations of Articles 92 and 121 of the UCMJ.  Violations of UCMJ Articles 92 and 121 are considered serious offenses.  Since no other Narrative Reason for Separation could more clearly describe why the Applicant was discharged, a change would be inappropriate.

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 additional evidence related to this 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 9, effective 
22 Jul 94 until 02 Oct 96, Article 3630600, 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, and Article 121, larceny.

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