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


FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY


ex-YNSA, USN
Docket No. ND06-00209

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20051108. 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 20060927 . 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 commission of a serious offense .

---

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application and attached letter:

“My name is G_ G_ (Applicant). I am writing to give my issues and testimony in hopes of a decision to have the character of my discharge received on 20 APR 2005 overturned from a General Under Honorable Conditions to an Honorable Discharge from the United States Navy.

While I still claim my innocence in the matter that I did not throw any bottles or chairs over the balcony, I was there, and did nothing to stop it, which makes me just as guilty as anyone else. So in the end, there are no innocent parties in the matter, there’s only guilty, and guilty by association. But guilty by association is still guilty, bottom line. On that note, I admit my guilt on this incident. But I do not feel that my untimely discharge was justified considering I only had 5 months of Naval Service left on a second offense after 43 months of service, while others in the command are retained after 3 or 4 offenses, some with matters more serious this one. I think that it all comes down to the fact that I was hanging around the wrong crowd, and I feel that I was at the wrong place at the wrong time, doing the wrong thing with the wrong people. I didn’t realize the ramifications of my actions at the time, but I realize them now. I ask you not to withhold the Montgomery G. I. Bill and other VA benefits that I could have received based on that mistake, and the general lack of self control that I displayed on the night of the incident that would ultimately result in the untimely end of my Naval Service.

Please let the record show that while in uniform, I feel that I was a good sailor. I enjoyed my time as a Submarine Yeoman, and I feel I was an asset to the YN Division, as well as a SONAR Division as an underway watchstander.

I am now in pursuit of new and exciting career opportunities, and it is my intention to receive a higher education, in which The Montgomery G. I. Bill as well as other benefits would be extremely helpful to me.

Despite the character of my discharge, I feel that the military was a very worthwhile experience, and I learned a very great deal about the world and a lot of myself during my tenure from start to finish. Although it didn’t quite work out while I was in, I know that it will definitely work out in life with the life experience and knowledge I was given while serving in the United States Navy, without question. I am grateful to have been given the opportunity to serve my country and help protect the freedom that many Americans gave their lives for, so that all Americans could enjoy. Thank you very much for your time.”

---

Documentation

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

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

---

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     20001212 - 20010913      COG
         Active: None

Period of Service Under Review :

Date of Enlistment: 20010914             Date of Discharge: 20050420

Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 03 07 06
         Inactive: None

Time Lost During This Period (days):

         Unauthorized absence: None
         Confinement:              None

Age at Entry: 17 (Parental Consent)

Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 12                                 AFQT: 61

Highest Rate: YN3

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance: 3.0 (3 )              Behavior: 2.33 ( 3 )                         OTA: 2.95

Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, (as listed on the DD Form 214): Sea Service Deployment Ribbon, Flag Letter of Commendation, Navy Expeditionary Medal, Navy Unit Commendation Medal, Global War On Terrorism Expeditionary Medal, Global War on Terrorism Service Medal, Battle Efficiency Ribbon

---

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

GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS) /MISCONDUCT, authority: MILPERSMAN, Article 1910-142 (formerly 3630605).

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

040506:  Applicant to unauthorized absence at 0730 on 040506. Applicant from unauthorized absence at 1000 on 040506 (15.5 hrs).

040507:  Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (a. Disobeying a direct order, to wit, when ordered to complete daily task you have failed complete the task assigned. b. Absence without authority, to wit, on numerous occasions you have failed to muster with your division at appointed times. The most recent which occurred on 6 May 04, where you were UA from 0730-1000. c. Your continued performance/conduct has caused continued work for members in your division who have had to complete your daily tasks.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

040514:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 80: Attempts.
         Specification: In that YN3 (SS) G_ A. G_ (Applicant), U.S. Navy, USS GREENEVILLE (SS 772), attempted to willfully deceive by altering his military identification card.
Violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Absence without leave.
Specification: In that YN3 (SS) G_ A. G_ (Applicant), U.S. Navy, USS GREENEVILLE (SS 772), on or about 0730, 6 May 2004, without authority, absent himself from his organization to wit: USS GREENEVILLE (SS 772), located at Pearl Harbor Hawaii, and did remain so absent until 1000, 06 May 2004.
Violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Failure to obey order or regulation.
Specification: In that YN3 (SS) G_ A. G_ (Applicant), U.S. Navy, USS GREENEVILLE (SS 772), on or about 0730, 05 May 2004, having knowledge of a NAVPERS 1070/613 dated 29 April 2002, by consuming alcohol while under the legal drinking age.
Violation of UCMJ, Article 107: False official statements.
Specification: In that YN3 (SS) G_ A. G_ (Applicant), U.S. Navy, USS GREENEVILLE (SS 772), on or about 1500, 7 May 2004, with intent to deceive, make to a Disciplinary Review Board a statement which was totally false and was then know by said to be false.
Violation of UCMJ, Article 108: Military property of the United States-sale, loss, damage, destruction, or wrongful disposition.
Specification: In that YN3 (SS) G_ A. G_ (Applicant), U.S. Navy, USS GREENEVILLE (SS 772), without proper authority, willfully damaged by alteration his military identification card.
Violation of UCMJ, Article 123: Forgery.
Specification: In that YN3 (SS) G_ A. G_ (Applicant), U.S. Navy, USS GREENEVILLE (SS 772), with intent to defraud, falsely alter the date of birth on his military identification card, to wit, altering the year from 1983 to 1980, to wit said year would, if genuine, operate as a legal identification.
         Award: Forfeiture of $747.75 per month for 2 months, reduction to E-3 and CCU for 30 days. No indication of appeal in the record.

050330:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Dereliction in the performance of duties.
         Specification: In that YNSN (SS) A_ G. G_ (Applicant), who knew of his duties onboard USS GREENEVILLE (SSN 772) Naval Submarine Base Point Loma, CA on or about 10 March 2005, was derelict in the performance of his duty in that he willfully failed to not drink ten hours prior to the normal working day, get more than four hours of sleep prior to the normal working day, failed to muster with his division at all hands muster per the Plan of the Day at 0800, and failed a fit for full duty screening.
         Violation of UCMJ, Article 134: Drunk and disorderly conduct.
         Specification: In that YNSN (SS) A_ G. G_ (Applicant), onboard USS GREENEVILLE (SSN 772) at Naval Submarine Base Point Loma, CA on 10 March 2005, displayed drunk and disorderly conduct by throwing empty beer bottles from the BEQ. Disorderly: Disorderly conduct is conduct of such a nature as to affect the peace and quiet of persons who may witness it an who may be disturbed or provoked to resentment thereby. It includes conduct that endangers public morals or outrages public decency and any disturbance of a contentious or turbulent character.
         Violation of UCMJ, Article 108: Destruction of military property.
         Specification: In that YNSN (SS) A_ G. G_ (Applicant), onboard USS GREENEVILLE (SSN 772) at Naval Submarine Base Point Loma, CA on 10 March 2005, destroyed government property by throwing a chair over the balcony of the BEQ.
Violation of UCMJ, Article 107: False official statement.
Specification: In that YNSN (SS) A_ G. G_ (Applicant), onboard USS GREENEVILLE (SSN 772) at San Diego, CA on 13 Mar 2005 at about 0335, was stopped by base security and was asked by MA1 W_ if he had been drinking and he responded “NO”. MA1 W_ could smell a strong odor of alcohol coming form G_ (Applicant) and he could see that YNSN G_ (Applicant)’ eyes were bloodshot and watery (See draft report for details). MA1 W_ placed YNSN G_ (Applicant) under military apprehension because of his intoxication level and felt he could not care for his safety or the safety of others. YNSN G_ (Applicant) was transported to t he command and turned over to the Duty Chief FT1 (SS) F_. Award: Restriction for 30 days, reduction to E-2. No indication of appeal in the record.

050404:  Applicant was disqualified for duty in submarines prior to administrative separation for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.

050404:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with the least favorable characterization of service as general (under honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct due to commission of a Serious Offense.

050404:  Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult with counsel, elected to waive all rights.

050404:  Commanding Officer, Naval Submarine Support Command, Pearl Harbor, directed the Applicant’s discharge with a General (Under Other Than Honorable Conditions) by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.

Service Record was missing elements of the Summary of Service.

---

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 20050420 by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (A and B) with a service characterization of under other than 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 requested an honorable discharge. 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 two nonjudicial punishment proceedings for violations of Articles 80, 86, 92, 107, 108, and 134 of the UCMJ. Violations of UCMJ Articles 92 (violating an other lawful order and willful dereliction), 107 (false official statements), and 108 (willfully destroy military property) 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 requested that the Board not “withhold the Montgomery G.I. Bill and other VA benefits.” The Veterans Administration determines eligibility for post-service benefits not the Naval Discharge Review Board. Further, 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. 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 on the propriety and equity of the discharge.

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), re-issued October 2002, effective 22 Aug 02 until 25 April 2005, Article 1910-142 [formerly 3630605], SEPARATION 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 (violate an other lawful order and willful dereliction), and 107 (false official statements), 108 (willfully destroy military property).

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