Author: CAP
Last saved by: Department of the Navy
Company: NCPB

Docket No. ND03-00826

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

 ex-CTISN, USN
Docket No. ND03-00826

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20030411.  The Applicant requests the 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 list any representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20040303.  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)/PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-140 (formerly 3630600).

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

“1.  My discharge was improper because although I was having financial troubles at the time of discharge, I was working towards remedying those problems.  It was also stated to me that I would be able to utilize the GI Bill to go to college with a General (under honorable conditions) discharge however I found out later that this is not possible.  

While applying for financial aide to attend Northern Arizona University I found that it was possible to submit this form and request a discharge review and hopefully be able to take advantage of the GI Bill, which I contributed to.”

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)	960610 - 970603	COG
	Active:   USN 			None

Period of Service Under Review:

Date of Enlistment:  970604		Date of Discharge:  990813

Length of Service (years, months, days):

	Active:    02  02  10
	Inactive:  None

Age at Entry:  18			Years Contracted:  4 

Education Level:  12			AFQT:  76

Highest Rate:  CTISN

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance: * NMA		Behavior:  NMA		OTA:  NMA

Military Decorations:  None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards:  Rifle Marksman

Days of Unauthorized Absence:  None

*  No Marks Available for review
Character, Narrative Reason, and Authority of Discharge (at time of issuance):

GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT, authority:  NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-140 (formerly 3630600).

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events:

990209:	NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Failure to obey a lawful order on or about 981209 by having in his possession a flammable substance and heat producing appliance, violation of UCMJ, Article 134: Did on or about 981209 possess alcohol as a minor.
	Award: Forfeiture of $275.10 for 7 days, extra duty for 14 days.  No indication of appeal in the record.

990305:	Retention Warning:  Advised of deficiency (Violation of the UCMJ, Article 92, failure to obey a lawful order; violation of the UCMJ, Article 134, possession of an alcoholic beverage as a minor.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning. 

990514:	Retention Warning:  Advised of deficiency (Failure to have sufficient funds for check #299 made and uttered to the Army and Air Force Exchange Service worth $315.00 on 990213.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning. 

990726:	Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge general under honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.

990726:	Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights.

991005:	Commanding Officer recommended discharge with a characterization of general under honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.  Commanding Officer’s comments (verbatim): [Seaman G_ (Applicant) reported to my detachment at Naval Technical Training Center Detachment, Goodfellow on 19 October 1998.  Despite counseling, Seaman G_ continually failed to maintain sufficient funds in his checking account.  He has become a burden to this command.  Therefore, he was separated from the naval service.]

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 19990813 with a characterization of general under honorable conditions for misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct (A).  The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (B).  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).

Issue 1:  The Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing educational opportunities as requested in the issue.  Regulations limit the Board’s review to a determination on the propriety and equity of the discharge.  The Applicant’s service record is marred by award of non-judicial punishment (NJP) and insufficient funds in his checking account.  In the Applicant’s case, the Board could discern no impropriety or inequity and therefore considered the Applicant’s discharge proper and equitable.   Relief denied.  

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 the service.  However, the NDRB is authorized to consider outstanding post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge, to the extent that such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the Applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review.  Verifiable proof of any post-service accomplishments must be provided in order for the Applicant to claim post-service conduct and behavior as a reason to upgrade a less than honorable discharge.  Evidence of continuing educational pursuits, a positive employment record, and certification of community service and non-involvement with civil authorities are examples of verifiable proof that can be submitted.   

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 additional documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments 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 18, effective
12 Dec 1997 until 21 Aug 2002, Article 1910-140 (formerly 3630600), SEPARATION BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT - PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT.

B.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (Manual for Discharge Review, 1984), enclosure (1), Chapter 2, AUTHORITY/POLICY FOR DEPARTMENTAL DISCHARGE REVIEW.  

C.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (Manual for Discharge Review, 1984), enclosure (1), Chapter 9, paragraph 9.2, PROPRIETY OF THE DISCHARGE.

D.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (Manual for Discharge Review, 1984), enclosure (1), Chapter 9, paragraph 9.3, EQUITY OF THE DISCHARGE.

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 “afls14.jag.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:

		Naval Council of Personnel Boards
		Attn:  Naval Discharge Review Board
		720 Kennon Street SE Rm 309
		Washington Navy Yard DC  20374-5023

The remaining portion of this document is divided into 4 Parts: Part I - Applicant’s Issues and Documentation, Part II - Summary of Service, Part III – Rationale for Decision and Pertinent Regulation/Law, Part IV - Information for the Applicant.
INDEX: