Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00012
Original file (ND99-00012.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-MSSN, USN
Docket No. ND99-00012

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 981001, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. The applicant did not list any person or organization as his representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 990920. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, NDRB discerned no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the applicant’s service. The Board’s vote was unanimous that the character of the discharge shall not change. The discharge shall remain: UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/Misconduct - Pattern of Misconduct, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

 Prior to the documentary discharge review, the applicant introduced no issues in block 8 on the DD Form 293.


Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
Copy of DD Form 214

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: USN                        841110 - 880131  HON
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     840928 - 841109  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 880201                Date of Discharge: 920506

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 04 03 06
         Inactive: None
Age at Entry: 22                           Years Contracted: 6

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 48
Highest Rate: MS2(SS)

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.88 (5)             Behavior: 3.60 (5)                OTA: 3.75

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: Enlisted Submarine Breast insignia (SS); GCM; BER; SSBN Deterrent Pin; Letter of Commendation.

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/Misconduct – Pattern of misconduct, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

910307:  Received Alcohol Abuse screening. SNM is found to not be alcohol dependent. Recommend SNM attend Level II treatment.

910319:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article111: Drunken or reckless driving.
         Award: Oral reprimand. Forfeiture of $200 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 30 days, reduction to MS3. Reduction suspended for 6 months. No indication of appeal in the record.
910322:  Retention warning from Commanding Officer, Naval Submarine Base, Bangor WA: Advised of deficiency (Alcohol Abuse), notified of corrective actions and assistance available (Completion of Level I and II), advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

910716:  Retention warning from Commanding Officer, Naval Submarine Base, Bangor WA: Advised of deficiency (Placement on Petty Officer Quality Control per BUPERS ltr), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

911126:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92 (2 specs.): Failure to obey a lawful order.
         Award: Oral reprimand. Forfeiture of $50 per month for 1 month, restriction and extra duty for 15 days, reduction to MS3. Reduction suspended for 6 months. No indication of appeal in the record.
911216:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 121: Larceny or wrongful appropriation.
Award: Oral reprimand, forfeiture of $200 per month for 1 month, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to MS3. No indication of appeal in the record.

911219:  Commanding Officer, Naval Submarine Base, Bangor, WA notified applicant of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct as evidenced by his service record entries.

911220:  Applicant advised of his rights and having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to appear before an Administrative Discharge Board.
910221:  An Administrative Discharge Board, based upon a preponderance of the evidence and by unanimous vote, found that the applicant had committed misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. By a unanimous vote, found the misconduct warranted a suspended separation. By a vote of 2 to 1, the board recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions.

920406:  Commanding officer Naval Submarine Base, Bangor, WA recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. Commanding officer’s comments: “I recommend the MS3 (applicant) be separated from the naval service and that the characterization of that discharge be under Other Than Honorable conditions. MS3 (applicant) has received three captain’s masts for serious offenses, which involved not only poor judgment on his part, but also active deceit. His actions are simply incompatible with further service in the Navy. Despite his prior performance, MS-3 (applicant's) behavior does not merit the opportunity that a suspended Other Than Honorable discharge would offer. I therefore disagree with the recommendation of the Administrative Board. I also disagree with the comment of the board’s dissenting member regarding the characterization of MS3 (applicant's discharge. Regardless of his past service, the serious nature of the UCMJ violations that MS3 (applicant's) has committed certainly merits characterization of his discharge as Other Than Honorable.”

920423:  BUPERS directed the applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 920506 under other than 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).

The applicant introduced no decisional issues for consideration by the Board.

The pattern of misconduct by the applicant is well documented and includes numerous serious offenses under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). The term "serious offense" should not be confused with what is considered serious in the civilian world. The Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) categorizes a wide range of offenses: disrespectful language, failure to obey a lawful order or written regulation, such as not maintaining hair within standards, drunken driving, forgery, missing ship's movement, unauthorized absence for 30 days or more, making false official statements, and so forth, right up to the most "serious" crimes of spying, aiding the enemy in time of war, mutiny, rape and murder. Although all of these offenses come under the broad UCMJ category of "serious offenses," some are clearly more heinous than others. A person in the military must abide by the standards as set forth in the UCMJ, regardless of what guidelines his civilian counterparts might utilize. While the board regrets that the applicant must live with the stigma associated with the term "serious offense," it cannot justify changing the reason for discharge unless it is inappropriate in describing the circumstances surrounding the applicant's discharge.

The Board finds the discharge to be equitable and proper. Accordingly, relief is denied.


Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

 A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C, effective 15 Aug 91 until
04 Mar 93), Article 3630600, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT – A 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 obtain a copy of DoD Directive 1332.28 by writing to:
                  DA Military Review Boards Agency
                  Management Information and Support Directorate
                  Armed Forces Reading Room
                  Washington, D.C. 20310-1809

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
                  Washington Navy Yard
                  720 Kennon St SE Rm 309
                  Washington, D.C. 20374-5023     

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500836

    Original file (ND0500836.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. No indication of appeal in the record.910227: Retention Warning from USS MCCLUSKY (FFG-41): Advised of deficiency (violation of a lawful written order), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.910708: Drug and Alcohol Evaluation: Applicant appears to be dependent upon alcohol. ...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-01118

    Original file (ND02-01118.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A day later, on August 17, I was told by legal (PO1 S_) in TPU to sign a new admin sep notice but this time the reason was "PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT" (MILPERSMAN 1910-140) therefore not entitled to sep. pay. At this time, the Applicant has not provided such documentation for the Board to consider.The Applicantis reminded that he remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received at the NDRB within 15 years from the date of his discharge. PART IV -...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600162

    Original file (ND0600162.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Petty Officer M_(Applicant) was separated locally for personality disorder, pattern of misconduct and commission of a serious offense. The Applicant implies that his discharge was improper due to contradicting statements from his command and because he was not “given the right to take matters further up Chain of Command.” In the Applicant’s remarks from DD Form 293, the Applicant implies that he was denied his “rights to see the admiral.” The Applicant also states that he was not given...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00104

    Original file (ND01-00104.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00104 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 001030, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. 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’s first issue states that his discharge was inequitable since it was based on “two isolated incidents, neither of which were...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00403

    Original file (ND02-00403.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-MSSR, USN Docket No. Award: Confinement for 10 days, forfeiture of $563 per month for 1 months, reduction to E-1 and restriction for 20 days.911213: To confinement.911222: From confinement to full duty.920110: Commander, Submarine Group 9 notified applicant of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00899

    Original file (ND02-00899.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00899 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020612, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. CA action 921027: Sentence approved and ordered executed.921119: Retention Warning from [USS JOHN F KENNEDY (CV-67)]: Advised of deficiency (Misconduct as evidenced by a Summary Court-Martial on 921014, for violation of the UCMJ, Article 86 (4 Specifications): Specification 1: Unauthorized absence from 920427 until...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00054

    Original file (ND02-00054.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In the acknowledgement letter to the applicant, the applicant was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing. 920304: BUPERS directed the applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500323

    Original file (ND0500323.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered: Applicant’s DD Form 214 Applicant’s resumé (2 pages) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 891013 - 900807 COG Active: None Period of Service Under Review :Date of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00133

    Original file (ND00-00133.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I only ask that my discharge be upgraded to an "honorable" status. Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :821012: Applicant ordered to active duty for 36 months under the Active Mariner Program.830818: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence from appointed place of duty, 0545-0600, 25Jul83. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 851031 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00025

    Original file (ND04-00025.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). I asked OS1 O_ who directly heard EN1 F_ grant me liberty to please submit a letter to the Captain and to accompany me to Captains mast as a witness. The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, reflects his disobedience of the orders and directives which regulate good order and discipline in the...