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

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

 ex-STGSA, USN
Docket No. ND06-00959

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20060713.  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.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20070510.  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.

PART I - ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Decisional Issues

Equity:  Post- Service
Equity:  Personal Problems

Documentation

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

Applicant’s DD Form 214 (Member 4)
Letter from Applicant, dtd May 24, 2006 (2 pgs)

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

	Inactive:  USNR (DEP)	19990525 - 19990607	COG
	Active:    None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  19990608		Date of Discharge:  20020726

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    03  01  19  (Does not exclude lost time.)
	Inactive:  None

Time Lost During This Period (days):

	Unauthorized absence:  4 days
	Confinement:		  None

Age at Entry:  20

Years Contracted:  4 (12-month extension)

Education Level:  12				AFQT:  89

Highest Rate:  STG3

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance:  3.33 (3)		Behavior:  3.33 (3)		 	OTA:  3.11

Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, (as listed on the DD Form 214):  Battle “E” Ribbon, Sea Service Deployment Ribbon, Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal, National Defense Service Medal, Letter of Commendation

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: 

001102:	Retention Warning NAVPERS 1070/613.  [Extracted from CO’s ltr of 020726 – no further information.]

010503:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 111: Drunken or reckless operation of a vehicle, aircraft, or vessel on 15 Feb 2001 in Norfolk, VA.
	Award:  30 x 30.  No indication of appeal in the record.

010904:	Applicant to unauthorized absence at 0500 on 010904.

010907:	Applicant from unauthorized absence at 0900 on 010907 (4 days/surrendered).

011019:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Absence without leave on or about 010904.  Award:  Reduction to E-3.  No indication of appeal in the record.

020716:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 134: Drunkenness, incapacitation for performance of duties through prior wrongful indulgence in intoxicating liquor or any drug.  Award:  Restriction and extra duties for 45 days, reduction to next inferior pay grade, and administrative separation.  No indication of appeal in the record.

020719:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with the least favorable characterization of service as general (under honorable conditions) by reason of pattern of misconduct.

020719:	Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult with counsel, elected to waive all rights except the right to submit a written statement for consideration by separation authority and the right to obtain copies of the documents used to support the basis for the separation.

020726:	Commanding Officer directed the Applicant's discharge with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct pattern of misconduct.  “STGSA K_‘s [Applicant] struggle with alcohol dependence has made him incompatible with continued military service.  His repeated failure to correct his deficiencies have ultimately resulted in this regrettable outcome.  He is not recommended for retention or advancement.”

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 20020726 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 Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (E).

The Applicant requests upgrade of his characterization of discharge to honorable.  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 a retention warning and three nonjudicial punishment proceedings for violations of UCMJ Articles 86, 111, and 134.  Violations of UCMJ Article 111 are considered serious offenses for which a punitive discharge is authorized at courts martial.  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 contends his disciplinary problems were the result of his alcohol dependence and stress caused by financial and family problems.  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 most members of the Navy serve honorably and therefore earn their honorable discharges.  In fairness to those members, 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.

The Applicant said that access to GI bill benefits was his reason for requesting upgrade of his discharge.  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 mentioned post - service accomplishments in support of his request for upgrade of his characterization of discharge.  The following is provided for the edification of the Applicant.  Normally, to permit relief, a procedural impropriety or inequity must have occurred during the discharge process for the period of enlistment in question.  The Board discovered no impropriety after a review of Applicant’s case.  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 may be provided to the Board include proof of educational pursuits, verifiable employment records, documentation of community service, credible evidence of a substance free lifestyle and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities.  As of this time, the Applicant has not provided sufficient post-service documentation to consider mitigating the misconduct that resulted in the characterization of 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 18, effective
12 Dec 1997 until 21 Aug 2002, Article 1910-140 (formerly 3630600), 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, Articles 111 (drunken or reckless operation of a vehicle).

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.

E.  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 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