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

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

ex-CSSN, USN
Docket No. ND06-00702

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20060504.  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 designated the Disabled American Veterans as the representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20070208.  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) by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.

The NDRB did note administrative error(s) on the original DD Form 214.  Block 13, Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, should read:  “National Defense Service Medal, Battle Efficiency Award, Navy Unit Commendation, Sea Service Deployment Ribbon, Global War on Terrorism Service Medal.”  The Commander, Navy Personnel Command, Millington, TN, will be notified, recommending the DD Form 214 be corrected or reissued, as appropriate.

PART I - ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Applicant Issues:

The Applicant States “I want my discharge change so I can use my G.I. Bill to go back to school to excel myself.  I have learned to control my anger and better myself.”

The Applicant is requesting a discharge upgrade based on equity regarding the character of discharge.  The Applicant is also claiming youth and immaturity as contributing factors to his misconduct.

Documentation

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

None

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive:  USNR (DEP)	20010524 - 20010529	COG
	Active:    None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  20010530		Date of Discharge:  20050705

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    04  01  06
	Inactive:  None

Time Lost During This Period (days):

	Unauthorized absence:  None
	Confinement:		  None

Age at Entry:  24

Years Contracted:  4 (9-month extension)

Education Level:  12				AFQT:  35

Highest Rate:  CS3

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  2.3 (4)		Behavior:  1.8 (4)		OTA:  2.46

Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, (as listed on the DD Form 214):  National Defense Service Medal, Battle Efficiency Award, Navy Unit Commendation, Sea Service Deployment Ribbon, Globar War on Terrorism 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: 

041021:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Failure to go to place of duty.
Violation of UCMJ, Article 91: Willful disobedience of a Petty Officer.
	Award:  Restriction and extra duty for 30 days, reduction to E-3.  Reduction suspended for 3 months.  No indication of appeal in the record.

041021:	Retention Warning:  Advised of deficiency (Violation of the UCMJ, Articles 86 and 91.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

050608:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Absence for unit.
Violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Failure to obey a lawful order.
Violation of UCMJ, Article 117: Provoking speeches and gestures.
	Award:  Restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to E-3.  No indication of appeal in the record.

050627:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with the least favorable characterization of service as general (under honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct - pattern of misconduct.

050627:	Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult with counsel, elected to waive all rights.

050628:	Commanding Officer, directed discharge with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of pattern of misconduct.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 20050705 by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct (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 Applicant is requesting an honorable discharge upgrade.  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 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 one retention warnings, 2 nonjudicial punishment proceedings for violations of Articles 86 (Unauthorized absence), 91 (Willful disobedience of a Petty Officer) and 117 (Provoking speeches and gestures) of the UCMJ.  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 and falls far short of that required for an upgrade of his characterization of service.  Relief is not warranted.

The Applicant states “I want my discharge change so I can use my G.I. Bill to go back to school to excel myself.  I have learned to control my anger and better myself.”  The Veterans Administration determines eligibility for post-service benefits, not the Naval Discharge Review Board.  There is no requirement or law that grants recharacterization solely on the issue of obtaining Veterans' benefits and this issue does not serve to provide a foundation upon which the Board can grant relief.  Additionally, the Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational opportunities.  Regulations limit the Board’s review to a determination of the propriety and equity of the discharge.  

The Applicant is also claiming youth and immaturity as contributing factors to his misconduct.  The statement contained in the application that the Applicant’s admission was due to his youth and immaturity was found to be insufficient justification to warrant a change in the characterization and reason for discharge.  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 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 11, effective 
26 April 2005 until Present, Article 1910-140, SEPARATION BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT - PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT.

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 91 (Willful disobedience of a Petty Officer). 

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 Instruction 1332.28, you may submit a complaint in accordance with Enclosure (5) of that Instruction.  You should read Enclosure (5) of the Instruction 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 Instruction 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