Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00487
Original file (ND99-00487.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-ABHAN, USN
Docket No. ND99-00487

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 990219, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions. The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. The applicant did not list any representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 991213. 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

 1. My Other Than Honorable Discharge was inequitable because it was based on some incorrect information & was isolated on an CO's NJP 11May89 when it could not be processed as a pattern of misconduct so they added them together to make it a willful serious offense by commission of.

2. The Other Than Honorable Discharge is improper because it was submitted to the Chief of Naval Personnel (Pers 83) with the wrong SSN.

3. It is also improper when they had proof that I was on legal hold after being arrested on the 29 day of being UA downtown Long Beach.

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

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: None
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     871017 - 880816  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 880817               Date of Discharge: 920917

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 04 01 01
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 17                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 33

 Highest Rate: ABH3

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.27 (6)    Behavior: 3.30 (6)                OTA : 3.27

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: SASM w/2 Bronze Star, CGSOSR, SSDR, NDSM, NUC, MUC

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: 78

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 :

880819:  Applicant briefed on Navy policy on drug and alcohol abuse.

880819:  Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (Non-swim qualified.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.
        
880909:  Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (Non-swim qualified.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.
        
890511:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Disobey a lawful order, violation of UCMJ Article 134: Drunk and disorderly, violation of UCMJ Article 116: Breach of peace.
         Award: Forfeiture of $100 per month for 1 month, restriction and extra duty for 21 days. No indication of appeal in the record.
910821:  Applicant to unauthorized absence 0700, 21Aug91.

 910829:  Applicant from unauthorized absence 1800, 22Aug91 (1 day/surrendered).

 920305:  Applicant to unauthorized absence 0700, 5Mar92.

 920313:  Applicant from unauthorized absence 0700, 13Mar92 (7 days/surrendered).
920316:  Applicant to unauthorized absence 0700, 16Mar92.

920317:  Applicant missing movement.

 920526:  Applicant from unauthorized absence 0730, 26May92 (70 days/surrendered).

920603:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Absence without leave, violation of UCMJ Article 87: Missing movement.
         Award: Restriction for 60 days. No indication of appeal in the record.
920708:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.
920709:          Applicant advised of his rights and having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to appear before an Administrative Discharge Board.
920723:  Applicant waived his right to an Administrative Discharge Board and representation at the board and to make a statement.

920803:  Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.

920821:  CAAC Screening: A: ETOH abuser, psychologically dependent. Recommend Level III.

920908:  BUPERS directed the applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.

920915:  Applicant offered and declined inpatient treatment.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 920917 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (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’s first and third issue were appropriate at Captain’s Mast or an Administrative Board Hearing. The applicant’s first issue is not a basis for which the NDRB can authorize an upgrade. If there is additional information or evidence regarding the applicant’s discharge not available in the service record, the Board can not review this information unless the applicant supplies these documents. As such evidence was not provided, relief in this case is denied.

The applicant’s second issue is not germane to the propriety or equity of the applicant’s discharge. Relief 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 – COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE.

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 Street SE RM 309
                  Washington, D.C. 20374-5023     


Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00703

    Original file (ND01-00703.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00703 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010424, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions. Award: Forfeiture of $200 per month for 2 months, correctional custody for 30 days, reduction to SR. No indication of appeal in the record.920522: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence from appointed place of duty. You may view DoD Directive 1332.28 and other...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00414

    Original file (ND04-00414.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. 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. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant’s DD Form 214 Statement...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00445

    Original file (ND02-00445.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00445 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020226, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable and the reason for the discharge be changed to convenience of the government and a reenlistment code change to RE-1 and corresponding separation program number/designator. ]921129: Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00908

    Original file (ND01-00908.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 891201 under other than 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 proper and equitable (C and D).The applicant’s issue states: “At the time of my...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00134

    Original file (ND00-00134.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :891026: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 107: False official statement on 16Oct89, violation of UCMJ Article 134: Obstructing justice on 16Oct96. No indication of appeal in the record.910508: USS CONSTELLATION (CV-64) notified applicant of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense as evidenced by larceny of car audio equipment of a value of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00560

    Original file (ND03-00560.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. Decision A personal appearance discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20040325 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 Applicant’s conduct, which forms the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00792

    Original file (ND02-00792.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant's current enlistment DD Form 214 (2) Applicant's previous enlistment DD Form 214 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 761222 - 770530 COG USNR (DEP) 820610 - 820616 COG Active: USN 770531 - 810530 HON Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 820617 Date of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00262

    Original file (ND03-00262.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Also my division officer recommended retention instead of separation.”Applicant marked the box "I HAVE LISTED ADDITIONAL ISSUES AS AN ATTACHMENT TO THIS APPLICATION." At this time, the applicant has not provided any documentation for the Board to consider. Therefore, no relief will be granted.The applicant is reminded that he is eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of his discharge.

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-01239

    Original file (ND99-01239.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    830820: Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (Unauthorized absence from NTC, Great Lakes, IL commencing on/or about 0545, 820913 and termination on/or about 0830, 820922 and Unauthorized absence from USS CHARLESTON (LKA-113), located at Norfolk, VA commencing on/or about 830307 and termination on/or about 830423), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning. After a thorough review of the records,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00163

    Original file (ND01-00163.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00163 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 001121, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. Specification 2: Unauthorized absence 0730, 12Jul90 to 0730, 13Jul90 (1 day). Accordingly, I recommend administrative separation under other than honorable conditions.920106: BUPERS directed the applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.