Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00541
Original file (ND99-00541.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-AA, USN
Docket No. ND99-00541

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 990309, 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 designate a representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 991221. 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: GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/ PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-140 (formerly 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:
Letter from Licensed Professional Counselor, P_ S_, PhD dated Jun 11, 1998
Letter from Applicant's mother undated (2 copies)
CO, USS PELELIU's letter recommending applicant's discharged dated 10 Jul 98 (2 copies)
Copy of DD Form 214 (2 copies

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: None
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     961030 - 961113  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 961114               Date of Discharge: 980716

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 01 08 03
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 20                          Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 13                        AFQT: 74

 Highest Rate: AN (E-3)

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.0 (1)     Behavior: 1.0 (1)                 OTA: 2.67 (5.0 eval)

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: AFEM, SSDR, Expert Rifleman

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: 36

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

GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/MISCONDUCT – Pattern of misconduct, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-140 (formerly 3630600).

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

970815:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: unauthorized absence from 0500, 97JUL26 to 0730, 97JUL29.
         Award: Forfeiture of $450 per month for 1 months, restriction and extra duty for 30 days. No indication of appeal in the record.
970910:  Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (unauthorized absence from 26 Aug 97 to 29 Aug 97), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

980701:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86 (2 Specs): unauthorized absence from unit, as of 98MAY20 to 98MAY28 and 98JUN03 to 98JUN29.
         Award: Restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to E-2. No indication of appeal in the record.
980709:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with a General (under Honorable conditions) by reason of Misconduct due to a Pattern of Misconduct.

980709:  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

980710:  Commanding officer recommended discharge with a General (under Honorable conditions) by reason of Misconduct due to a Pattern of Misconduct. Commanding officer’s comments (verbatim): "AA (Applicant)'s misconduct is detrimental to the good order and discipline of this command. He has potential for service in a military organization, but cannot fulfill it with the family problems that he has. He is not recommended for reenlistment, but it is my recommendation that AA (Applicant) be discharged from the Naval Service and that his discharge should be characterized as General (Under Honorable Conditions)."

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 980716 with a General (under 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. Relief denied.

The following is provided for the applicant’s edification. There is no law or regulation that provides for the upgrade of an unfavorable discharge based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in civilian life, subsequent to leaving military service. The Board reviews the propriety (did the Navy follow its own rules in processing the applicant for discharge) and equity (did the applicant receive a discharge characterization in keeping with Navy guidance or was the characterization typical of other service members being separated for the same reason) of each applicant’s discharge. This applicant’s discharge was proper and equitable. Additionally, the NDRB is authorized to award clemency for post-service factors (what has the applicant done since discharge to become a contributing member of his/her community and to society in general). Those factors include but are not limited to the following: Evidence of continuing educational pursuits (transcripts, diploma, degree or vocational-technical certificates), a verifiable employment history (letter of recommendation from employer), documentation of community service (letter from activity/community group), certificate of non-involvement with civil authorities (police records check) and proof of not using drugs (detoxification certificate). The applicant has not provided any documentation of good character and conduct, which could possibly warrant an upgrade to his discharge. The applicant is encourage to begin to establish a reputation of good character and conduct. That will be his only recourse to obtaining an upgrade to his discharge. He is also reminded that he remains eligible for, and is strongly encouraged to schedule, a personal appearance hearing. Documentation to support any claims of good character are a must . An application must be received by the NDRB within fifteen years from the date of his discharge or it will be denied. It is advisable to have legal representation at the hearing.

 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 | 1999_Navy | ND99-00780

    Original file (ND99-00780.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ), notified of corrective actions and assistance available.971029: That portion of punishment of reduction in rate to next inferior paygrade, awarded at Commanding Officer’s Non-judicial Punishment on 28 August 1997, suspended for six months (RIR only), is hereby vacated effective 29 October 1997 due to continued misconduct as evidenced by your second violation of UCMJ Art, 92- Dereliction in the performance of duties. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00545

    Original file (ND01-00545.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00545 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010320, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. The applicant is eligible for a personal appearance hearing provided the application is received within 15 years from the date of discharge.

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-01039

    Original file (ND99-01039.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Commanding officer’s comments (verbatim): "I strongly agree with the Board's findings and recommend that OSSR (Applicant) be administratively discharged from the naval service by reason of his misconduct due to commission of a serious offense and misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct, and that the characterization of his discharge be under Other Than Honorable conditions. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00081

    Original file (ND00-00081.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 981224 with a 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 proper and equitable (C and D).The applicant introduced no decisional issues for consideration by the Board. PART IV - INFORMATION FOR THE...

  • 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 | 2002_Navy | ND02-01065

    Original file (ND02-01065.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Award: Restriction for 45 days. 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).A characterization of service of under honorable conditions (general) is warranted when significant negative aspects of a member's conduct or performance of duty outweigh the positive aspects of the member's military record. You should read Enclosure (5) of the Directive before...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00073

    Original file (ND02-00073.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 NDRB notified the applicant in a letter dated 020220 that the discharge package was not available, and advised the applicant that his case would be held for thirty days to allow him to provide discharge documentation. The applicant did not provide the Board with discharge documentation or post service...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00397

    Original file (ND01-00397.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00397 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010212, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. 990713: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86 (3 specs): Unauthorized absence, violation of UCMJ, Article 95: Resisting arrest, violation of UCMJ, Article 134 (5 specs): Drunk and disorderly, underage drinking, incapacitated for duty. The names, and votes of the members of the Board are...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00284

    Original file (ND02-00284.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I submit this application for a change in my discharge. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 Fifty-five pages from applicant's service record 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: 960522 Date of Discharge: 980729 Length of Service (years,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00819

    Original file (ND03-00819.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    011106: Vacate suspended reduction due to violation additional article of UCMJ. At this time, the Applicant has not provided sufficient documentation for the Board to consider an upgrade.The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of 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...