DRB DIGEST/EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
DRB DOCKET 2013-067
CURRENT DD-214 Under Honorable Conditions, COMDTINST M1000.6A, 12-B-18, JKA, Pattern of
Misconduct, RE4
BY DRB
CORRECTIONS Character of Service to Under Honorable Conditions.
TIS | 2 yrs, 8 months, 24 days
| Policy Implications | None
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The applicant was discharged for Pattern Of Misconduct due to a multitude of actions in 2008-2009. The
applicant was rendered a civil conviction order and directed to attend a 52 week anger management program
stemming from his actions in 2009. Shortly thereafter, the applicant was deliberately negligent in sleeping
while on watch in a government vehicle. The applicant’s command started process to Discharge based on a
‘Pattern of Misconduct’.
The applicant was notified of the intent to discharge, and the applicant was advised of rights to an attorney. A
statement was statement by the applicant to object to the Discharge.
The Board notes that an administrative correction was made by PSC-BOPS in June 2014 to the ‘Character of
Service’ on a DD-215 issued. The Servicing Personnel Office erroneously issued a Bad Conduct discharge to
the applicant in 2009; This has since been corrected to ‘Under Honorable Conditions’. The DD-215 is uploaded
into the service record, and the Board has confirmed the applicant’s receipt of the document. Henceforth, these
proceedings were to assess if an upgrade from Under Honorable Conditions to Honorable was merited.
The Board finds no issues with propriety or equity in this case following the recently issued DD-215 by PSC in
June 2014.
Propriety: Discharge was proper.
Equity: Discharge was equitable.
Final Adjudication by Assistant Commandant For Human Resources: No relief.
CG | DRB | 2014 - Discharge Review Board (DRB) | 2014 032
The NJP results specify that the spouse had suffered a fractured nose and received stitches. The separation package does show an Honorable recommendation from the Sector, but this is due to the pattern of misconduct vice the voluntary plea on the application and supporting statements. The Board finds no issues with propriety or equity in this case.
CG | DRB | 2013 - Discharge Review Board (DRB) | 2013 078
DRB DIGEST/EXECUTIVE SUMMARY DRB DOCKET 2013-078 NAME CURRENT DD-214 Under Honorable Conditions, COMDTINST M1000.4 ART 1.B.17, JKA, Pattern of Misconduct, RE4 a BY DRB CORRECTIONS TIS 3 yrs, 3 months, 18 days Policy Implications _| None EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The applicant was discharged for Pattern Of Misconduct due to two Non-Judicial punishments within a 2 year period. Thereafter, the SPO issued an Under Honorable Conditions character of Service. Based on the final approval made by EPM, the...
CG | DRB | 2013 - Discharge Review Board (DRB) | 2013 004
After receiving five negative 3307s, the applicant was officially placed on performance probation after six months as a crewmember. The SPD code JNC should remain intact; however, the narrative reason for separation on the DD-214 is incorrect. In accordance with the SPD Handbook, the narrative reason for SPD code JNC is “Unacceptable Conduct.” The Board recommends an administrative change from “General Misconduct” to “Unacceptable Conduct.’” Additionally, the Board recommends that the...
CG | DRB | 2013 - Discharge Review Board (DRB) | 2013 060
The applicant had a positive urinalysis result during a random testing in late 2012. The applicant’s had 10 years of service which afforded the right to an Administrative Separation Board (ASB) that occurred in the Spring of 2013. The Board finds no issues with propriety or equity in this case.
CG | BCMR | Discharge and Reenlistment Codes | 2011-186
Pursuant to a decision of the Discharge Review Board (DRB), on May 10, 2010, the Coast Guard issued a DD 215 to correct the appli- cant’s separation code and narrative reason for separation on his DD 214 to JND and “miscella- neous/general reasons,” respectively. On April 27, 2005, the Personnel Command issued orders for the applicant to be sepa- rated with a general discharge due to “alcohol rehabilitation failure” and an RE-4 reentry code within 30 days. Although the applicant was...
CG | BCMR | Discharge and Reenlistment Codes | 2011-090
This final decision, dated December 22, 2011, is approved and signed by the three duly APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND ALLEGATIONS The applicant asked the Board to upgrade his February 14, 2008, general discharge under honorable conditions to an honorable discharge; to upgrade his separation code (JKA) and narra- tive reason for separation (misconduct) on his discharge form DD 214; to upgrade his reenlist- ment code from RE-4 (ineligible) to RE-1 eligible; and to change the date of entry on active...
CG | DRB | 2013 - Discharge Review Board (DRB) | 2013 032
In early 2012, the applicant’s command initiated Discharge proceedings based on the two alcohol incidents. Furthermore, the applicant mentions no details or mitigating factors about the Felony Battery with no contest plea. Prior to epm’s final approval, the Admiral serving as the local Discharge authority fully endorsed the Discharge due to commission of a serious offense with a General, Under Honorable Conditions character of service.
CG | DRB | 2014 - Discharge Review Board (DRB) | 2014 029
In 2010, the applicant pled ‘no contest’ in a civilian court to third degree assault consummated by Battery. The Board has no issues with the discharge issued. The local command, intermediate level Commander, and EPM all endorsed the punishment rendered and the subsequent separation.
CG | BCMR | Discharge and Reenlistment Codes | 2009-148
States Code. 1992), the court stated that to determine whether the interest of justice supports a waiver of the statute of limitations, the Board “should analyze both the reasons for the delay and the potential merits of the claim based on a cursory review.” The court further instructed that “the 2 On January 4, 2010, the Board received a DD 149 from the applicant requesting an upgrade of his discharge and reenlistment code. On January 4, 2010, the Board received a new DD 149 from the...
CG | DRB | 2012 - Discharge Review Board (DRB) | 2012 076
The Board finds no issues with propriety in this case. The Board finds no issues of equity in this case. Therefore, the applicant should be issued a DD-215 reflecting this administrative change.