Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00077
Original file (ND99-00077.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-AR, USN
Docket No. ND99-00077

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 981020, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. The applicant listed AMERICAN LEGION as his representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 990927. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, NDRB discerned, although proper it is inequitable. The Board’s vote was unanimous that the character of the discharge shall change to: HONORABLE/SECRETARIAL AUTHORITY, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630900.





PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

 1. (EQUITY ISSUE) As the documentary evidence of record supports, this former member opines that his post service conduct had been sufficiently creditable to warrant the Board's clemency relief as authorized under provision of SECNAVINST 5420.174C, enclosure (1), paragraph 9.3.

 Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
Copy of DD Form 214
Resume (2pgs)
Letters of Recommendation (2)
Letter of response for Prime Time Live Internship program
Essay
Copy of Newspaper Article

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: USN                        None
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     940817 - 950205  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 950206               Date of Discharge: 970620

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 03 02 15
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 18                          Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 99

 Highest Rate: AN

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: NMA                  Behavior: NMA             OTA: NMA

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM, AFEM, ASM, SSDR

Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

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

GENERAL UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS/PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

970210:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: UA from 0630-0645, on 970130.
         Award: Forfeiture of $510 per month for 1 month, restriction and extra duty for 30 days, reduction to E-2 (suspended for 6 months). No indication of appeal in the record.
970326:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: UA from restricted muster with the VAW-126 SQUADRON Duty Officer on 970302, violation of UCMJ Article 92: Failure to obey a lawful order by failing to muster in a clean working uniform on 970227.
Award: Forfeiture of $451 per month for 2 months, 45 days restriction to limits of USS THEODORE ROOSEVELT (CVN-71) , and extra duty for 45 days. No indication of appeal in the record.
970326:  Vacate punishment of reduction to AA suspended at CO's NJP on 970210 due to continued misconduct.

970426:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge general under honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a commission of a serious offense as evidenced by CO's NJP 970326 for violation of UCMJ Article 92 (failure to obey a lawful order).

970426:          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.


PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 970620 general under honorable conditions for misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct (A). After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was improper and inequitable (B and C) given the circumstances.

The applicant’s representative, the American Legion, cited applicant’s post service conduct as warranting clemency relief and requested applicant’s discharge characterization be upgraded to honorable. The Board found applicant’s post service conduct warrants clemency. The Board also found applicant’s cited pattern of misconduct to be based upon a series of events evolving from a single 15 minute Unauthorized Absence. This “contrived” pattern of misconduct was improper and inappropriate. The Board found it to be too severe and not commensurate with the initial unauthorized absence offense. Accordingly, the Board found the applicant’s characterization, based upon his post service record and the impropriety/inequity that occurred, should be changed to HONORABLE and the reason changed from PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT to SECRETARIAL AUTHORITY.



Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

 A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C, Change 14, effective 03 Oct 96 until 30 Jun 97), Article 3630900, 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 9, paragraph 9.2, PROPRIETY OF THE DISCHARGE.

C. 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 | 2000_Navy | ND00-00748

    Original file (ND00-00748.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    990408: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 91: Failure to obey an order, violation of UCMJ Article 117: Provoking speeches or gestures.Award: Forfeiture of $479.00 per month for 1 month, restriction and extra duty for 30 days, reduction to E-1. After review of the applicant’ service record the NDRB found an administrative error in the reason for discharge for a pattern of misconduct. The applicant’s service record clearly documents the applicant’s misconduct that included two NJP’s with...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00618

    Original file (ND99-00618.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The discharge shall remain: UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/ PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-140 (formerly 3630600). The Board believes that the applicant is confusing this with the civilian world wherein some offenses are treated with leniency because they are a first time incident on an otherwise clear record. At this time, the applicant has not provided any documentation of good character and conduct.

  • USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-00114

    Original file (MD01-00114.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD01-00114 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 001030, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions. In the applicant’s issues 1 through 3, the Board found that although the applicant may have gotten a divorce, straightened out his financial problems and went back to school, this was not enough to upgrade his discharge to honorable. At this time, the applicant has not provided...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00451

    Original file (ND01-00451.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00451 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010227, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. Sm requested to be allowed in the service and was denied.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00504

    Original file (ND04-00504.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    “Dear Chairperson: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 evidence assembled for review, we continue to note the contention of the appellant in his request for a discharge upgrade of his current General Under Honorable Conditions discharge to that of Honorable.The FSM served on active service from October 1, 1996 to November 24, 1998 at which time he was discharged...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00773

    Original file (ND01-00773.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00773 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010515, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The discharge shall remain: GENERAL UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS/PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-140 (formerly 3630600). The applicant’s second issue states: “(American Legion's Equity Issue) This former member further requests that the Board include provision of SECNAVINST 5420.174C,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-01290

    Original file (ND02-01290.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-01290 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020911, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable and the reason for the discharge be changed to Re code upgrade. The Board found that in the Applicant’s case, the characterization of service should have been the “type warranted by service record.” A review of Applicant’s records indicated a general (under honorable conditions) discharge was warranted. You should read...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00039

    Original file (ND01-00039.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00039 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 001017, 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 (D and E).The applicant’s representative submitted the following as issue 1: (Equity Issue) This former member further requests that the Board include...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-01108

    Original file (ND01-01108.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) also advised that the Board first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged in absentia on 000224 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to drug abuse (use) (A). The applicant can provide additional documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments at that time.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00316

    Original file (ND02-00316.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. The Board disagrees with the Applicant’s claim that his record of NJP’s indicates only isolated or minor offenses. The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, reflects his willful disobedience of the orders and directives which regulate good order and discipline in the naval service, and falls short of that required for a fully honorable characterization of service.