Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00495
Original file (ND99-00495.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-GSMFA, USNR
Docket No. ND99-00495

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 990225, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to 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/ PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-140 (formerly 3630600).

The NDRB did note an administrative error on the original DD Form 214. Block 12a, Date Entered AD This Period should read "97 FEB 03" vice "97 FEB 04", Block 12c, Net Active Service This Period should read "01 02 26" vice "01 02 25" Block 25, Separation Authority should read "NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-140" vice "NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600", Block 28, Narrative Reason for Separation should read: “MISCONDUCT DUE TO PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT' vice “MISCONDUCT DUE TO DRUG ABUSE”. The original DD Form 214 should be corrected or reissued as appropriate.


PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

1. The violation of the UCMJ, Article 92 that I was charge and found guilty of should be change for the reason that the violation did not take place. Because the accused was found not guilty. (See Charge Sheet)

2. My DD214 states that I was discharge due to drugs. That's a false statement & still to this day I don't know why I was discharge.

3. Do to the type of discharge I have recived I can't find a good job/good trun me down because of my discharge.

4. I've been out of the Navy for 8 months and I think I should be intitled to almost all the Va plan should have to offer.

 Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
Copy of DD Form 214
Copy of charge sheet dated 4 March 1998
Statement from applicant
Letter from Department of Treasury to the applicant dated March 19, 1999

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: None
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     960719 - 970202  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 970203               Date of Discharge: 980428

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 01 02 26
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 19                          Years Contracted: 8

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 66

 Highest Rate: GSMFN

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: NMF                  Behavior: NMF             OTA: NMF

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: None

Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-140 (formerly 3630600).

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

970911:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence.
         Award: Forfeiture of $100 per month for 1 month, restriction and extra duty for 7 days. Restriction and extra duty suspended for 6 months. No indication of appeal in the record.
970911:  Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (Poor military performance,to wit: unauthorized absence.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

971006:  Vacate suspended restriction and extra duty awarded at NJP dated 970911.

980313:  Special Court-Martial.
         Charge I: violation of the UCMJ, Article 92:
         Specification: Failure to obey a lawful general regulation to wit: Article 1137, U.S. Navy Regulations from July 1997 to February 1998.
         Findings: to Charge I and specification 1 thereunder, guilty.
         Sentence: Fine of $500.00 for 3 months, confinement for 90 days, reduction to GMSFA.
         CA 980327: Sentence approved and ordered executed.
        
980331:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and misconduct due to commission of a serious offense as evidenced by all punishments under the UCMJ in your current enlistment.
980331:          Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights

980324:  Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.

980415:  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 980428 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).

 To permit relief, an error or injustice must be found to have existed during the period of enlistment under review. There was nothing in the records, nor did the applicant provide any documentation, to indicate there existed an error of fact, law, procedure, or discretion at the time of discharge. Specifically, if the applicant has further proof of an obvious injustice concerning his Special Court-Martial, this evidence should be presented. The applicant is reminded that he is eligible to appear before the NDRB in Washington D.C., provided the application is received within fifteen years of the applicant’s discharge. Representation at the personal appearance hearing is strongly recommended. Relief denied.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

 A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 18, effective
12 Dec 1997 until Present, Article 1910-140 (formerly 3630600), SEPARATION BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT - 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 | 2000_Navy | ND00-00370

    Original file (ND00-00370.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The discharge shall remain: UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/ PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-140 (formerly 3630600).The NDRB did note an administrative error on the original DD Form 214. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION The applicant’s issue 4 is a non-decisional issue for the Board.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00094

    Original file (ND00-00094.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The discharge shall remain: UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS but the reason should be corrected to say PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-140 (formerly 3630600).The NDRB noted an administrative error on the original DD Form 214. Applicant declared a deserter 98MAR13, having been an unauthorized absentee since 1130 98FEB10, from USS THEODORE ROOSEVELT (CVN 71).980616: Surrendered at Personnel Support Activity, MacDill AFB, Tampa, FL. The names, and votes of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00507

    Original file (ND01-00507.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    No indication of appeal in the record.000519: DD Form 214: Applicant discharged under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-140.Discharge package missing from service record. Accordingly the Board found these issues non decisional and relief is denied.The applicant’s third and fourth issues state: “I was a hard worker and I earned my plane captain qualification before most of the people that were there...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00067

    Original file (ND01-00067.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00067 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 001017, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. 980526: BUPERS directed the applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. In response to the applicant’s issues 1 and 2, the Board has no obligation to change the applicant’s discharge in order to allow him to get medical...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00634

    Original file (ND99-00634.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Issues Prior to the documentary discharge review, the applicant introduced no issues as block 8 on the DD Form 293 is blank. [EXTRACTED FROM REPORT AND DISPOSITION OF OFFENSE(S) (NAVPERS 1626/7]980126: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with a general under honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct as evidenced by Commanding Officer's non-judicial punishment of 2 Feb 96 for violation of UCMJ - Article 92 (failure to obey a lawful...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00849

    Original file (ND04-00849.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND04-00849 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20040427. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The Veterans Administration determines eligibility for post-service benefits not the Navy Discharge Review Board.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00876

    Original file (ND04-00876.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. I would like for my military records be reviewed to the times and reasons why I was given this discharge.” 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 720 Kennon Street SE Rm 309 Washington Navy Yard...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00281

    Original file (ND00-00281.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :980910: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence from 0700, 27Aug98 to 1230, 5Sep98 (9 days). 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 720 Kennon Street SE Rm 309 Washington Navy Yard DC 20374-5023

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-01164

    Original file (ND01-01164.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-SN, USN Docket No. The Applicant did not provide any of these documents. He is 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.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-01164 (2)

    Original file (ND01-01164 (2).rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-SN, USN Docket No. The Applicant did not provide any of these documents. He is 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.