Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00052
Original file (ND99-00052.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-SR, USNR
Docket No. ND99-00052

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 981005, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The applicant requested a personal appearance hearing discharge review. The applicant did not list any representative on the DD Form 293. In the acknowledgement letter to the applicant, he was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing.

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 – Commission of a serious offense, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

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


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):
         Active: None
         Inactive: None

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 880812               Date of Discharge: 901207

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 02 03 01
         Inactive: 00 00 24

 Age at Entry: 25                          Years Contracted: 8

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 28

 Highest Rate: SA

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 2.90 (2)    Behavior: 2.70 (2)                OTA : 2.90

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NEA, SSDR

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: 62

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/Misconduct – Commission of a serious offense, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

880907:  Applicant ordered to active duty for 36 months under the Active Mariner Program.
891012:  Applicant to unauthorized absence 0300, 12Oct89.

 891013:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Absence without leave.
         Award: Forfeiture of $391.80 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to E-1. Forfeiture suspended for 6 months. No indication of appeal in the record.
891016:  Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (Due to the abuse of alcohol, applicant applied poor judgement on liberty consequently, was absent from appointed place of duty.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.
        
900614:  Applicant's driving privileges suspended for 3 months as a result of failure to appear in the Naval Education and Training Center (NETC) Traffic Court on 30 May 1990 and for allowing an unlicensed person to drive your vehicle onboard NETC.

900919:  Applicant to unauthorized absence 0730, 90Sep19.

901009:  Applicant missed movement of vessel.

901018:  Applicant declared a deserter. Unauthorized absence since 0715, 19Sep90.

901120:  Applicant from unauthorized absence, 0840, 90Nov20. Apprehended by civil authorities 0745, Providence, RI and returned to military control 0840, 901120 (62 days/apprehended).

901127:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence from 0715, 19Sep90 to 0840,20Nov90 (62 days/apprehended).
         Award: Confinement on bread and water for 3 days. No indication of appeal in the record. Extracted from CO's message dated 3Dec90.
901127:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.
901127:          Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights except the right to obtain copies of the documents used to support the basis for the separation.
901203:  Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.

901205:  CNMPC directed the applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 901207 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (A and B). The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (C). 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 (D and E).

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

 Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

 A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560A), Change 8, effective
21 Aug 89 until 14 Aug 91, Article 3630600, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT – COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE.
B. Under the Manual for Courts-Martial, a punitive discharge is authorized for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Article [e.g., 86, for unauthorized absence for a period in excess of 30 days] if adjudged at a Special or General Court-Martial.
C. 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.

D. 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.

E. 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 Street SE Rm 309
                  Washington, D.C. 20374-5023     

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00279

    Original file (ND04-00279.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Application for VA Education Benefits (3 pages) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 890906 - 890916 COG Active: USN None Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 890917 Date of Discharge: 910924 Length of Service (years, months, days): Active: 02 00 08 Inactive: None Age at...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00617

    Original file (ND99-00617.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Outstanding post-service conduct, 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, may be considered by the NDRB. The applicant Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560A, Change 8 effective 21 Aug 89 until 14 Aug 91), Article 3630600, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT A PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00836

    Original file (ND03-00836.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/ under honorable conditions. Member has low potential for further naval service.900116: Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense. For the Applicant’s information, he may petition the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) for a change to his records if he believes that...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00050

    Original file (ND00-00050.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    911015: Assistant Secretary of the Navy (Manpower and Reserve Affairs) approved discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 920206 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (A and B). After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-01056

    Original file (ND00-01056.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-01056 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000915, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions. After a review of the Former Service Members (FSM) DD Form 293 Application for the Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the Armed Forces of the United States and all of the evidence assembled for review, we continue to set forth the request as established by the FSM's application...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-01161

    Original file (ND99-01161.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Decision A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 000522. 931201: Applicant to unauthorized absence 0715, 1Dec93.931206: Applicant apprehended by civil authorities and charge with 4 counts of failure to appear (5 days).931217: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under Other Than Honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the Commission of a serious offense as evidenced by your service record and civilian conviction as evidenced by...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00442

    Original file (ND00-00442.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-DCFR, USN Docket No. Applicant surrendered to military authorities on 1113, 900705 onboard USS FAIRFAX COUNTY at Little Creek, VA. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 910329 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (A).

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-01098

    Original file (ND99-01098.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    No indication of appeal in the record.920717: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence for 2 days, violation of UCMJ Article 92: Disobeying a lawful order. 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).In the applicant’s issue 1, the Board determined this issue is without merit. The applicant’s Commanding Officer was within his legal...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00566

    Original file (ND00-00566.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 930303 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (A). 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).In the applicant’s issue 1, the Board found that the applicant implies that a permissive doctrine exists...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00252

    Original file (ND01-00252.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    890705: Retention Warning from Naval Submarine School: Advised of deficiency (Abandoning watch or guard and failing to go to appointed place of duty at the prescribed time. Award: Forfeiture of $345 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 21 days, reduction to SR. No indication of appeal in the record.891215: Retention Warning from USS PEORIA (LST 1183): Advised of deficiency (Below average performance and non-conformity to naval rules and authority. 901120: Applicant from...