Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00548
Original file (ND99-00548.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-SR, USN
Docket No. ND99-00548

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 990311, 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 000110. 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 - Pattern of misconduct, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

 1. I feel that my release from the Navy is based on problems I had with personnel I had to deal with my last 1 1/2 years in. I have a history of bad nerves which limited my ability to deal with these problems. I brought up my problem with my chain of command at one time which nothing had been done. I guess it was viewed as an excuse. My problems began when I first came to the command (USS Peoria LST 1183) as a fireman. I had trouble dealing with personnel at that time mainly because of my inexeperince in that field. I was sent to the deck department about 7 mo's later. Things went OK with me for about a year. One incident in 1987 (about late summer that year) in Hong Kong started my downfall. I was out with friends in town we had a little too much too drink. I seriously overslept in which I had duty that day my friends left me behind, I was punished for that incident but that started a little anymosity toward me from the people that was above me including a couple petty officers who were new to the command. It seems that I was often (so were a couple of others) either accused of wrong doings that I had nothing to do with and I was often humiliated by either the division officer or the several times for incidents I had nothing to do with it came to a head in about May-June 1988 in which another incident in which someone else planted evidence against me once again I was humiliated in front of the division that was all I could take so I left on unauthorized absence for about 3-4 days to get myself together. I was sent to correcional custody unit for 30 days everything seemed to be OK until approximately 1-2 mos later I accidently missed ships movement my nerves tore me up after that it affected my judgement I went AWOL for 4 days till the ship came back and that I recieved a light punishment for that it caused a lot of recentment from several people that I had to deal with every day. (Even the commanding officer could tell that I was on the verge of a nervous breakdown when I appeared before him that time. Even though I was a very hard worker during the rest of my time there. I was still recieving abusive behavior from these people (the petty officers) I was always assigned dirty work which affected my appearance ruining some of my best clothes, were coveralls that always tore. Etc. But the last straw came around the holidays when my leave was denied. (I had not had an official leave for a year and a half) because once again I was accused of damaging some deck property with someone else and once again I was innocent. I could not take it no more and left for almost a month. My last days on that command went almost without incident because of these incidents my evaluations did not reflect on how hard of a worker I was on that ship. Several of my shipmates felt I was a valuble asset there because I worked about 18 hrs. on several days without complaint. My evaluation was based on what trouble I was in. I also feel I was forced out of the navy. I also feel I didn't serve 3 1/2 years for nothing. In all I feel I was mistreated severely it had a bad impact on my nerves which still bothers me today. This is all I have to say for now. Thank you for hearing me out.



 Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
Copy of DD Form 214 (Member 1)

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: None
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     850410 - 850806  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 850807               Date of Discharge: 890124

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 03 04 18
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 18                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 34

 Highest Rate: SN

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.13 (3)    Behavior: 3.33 (3)                OTA: 3.20

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: None

Days of Unauthorized Absence: 40

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/Misconduct - Pattern of misconduct, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

850813:  Retention Warning from Recruit Training Command, Naval Training Center, Great Lakes, IL: Advised of deficiency (4 th Class Swimmer qualified.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

860801:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Dereliction of duty on 86Jul22.
         Award: Forfeiture of $295 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 30 days, a special evaluation and a page 13 warning. No indication of appeal in the record.
860804:  Retention Warning from USS PEORIA (LST-1183): Advised of deficiency (Below average performance.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

870905:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence on 0715, 30Aug87 to 1205, 31Aug87 (1 day/surrendered).
         Award: Restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to SA and oral reprimand. No indication of appeal in the record.
880613:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Absence from unit from 0715, 31May88 to 2200, 3Jun88 (3 days, 14 hours and 45 minutes/surrendered)).
         Award: Correctional custody for 30 days. No indication of appeal in the record.
880826:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence from 0430, 15Aug88 to 0106, 22Aug88 (6 days, 20 hours, 36 minutes), violation of UCMJ, Article 87: Missing ship's movement on 15Aug88..
         Award: Restriction and extra duty for 10 days. No indication of appeal in the record.
881229:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Absence from unit 0715, 23Nov to 0420, 23Dec88 (30 days/surrendered).
         Award: Forfeiture of $335 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to SR. No indication of appeal in the record.
881229:  USS PEORIA (LST-1183) notified applicant of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.
881229:          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.
881230:  Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.

890107:  CNMPC 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 890124 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).

The applicant’s statement, submitted as an issue, was considered by the Board. The Board found no evidence to suggest the applicant was mistreated while on active duty. Furthermore, the applicant’s statement details extenuating and mitigating circumstances surrounding his NJP’s. The Board found the applicant’s discharge for a pattern of misconduct proper and equitable. Relief not warranted.

 The following is provided for the applicant’s edification. The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. The applicant must be aware that there is no law or regulation which provides that an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time, or good conduct in the civilian life subsequent to leaving the service. Normally, to permit relief, an error or injustice must have been found to have existed during the period of enlistment in question. 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 is reminded that he is eligible for a personal appearance hearing provided the application is received within 15 years from the date of discharge. Representation at personal appearance hearing is highly recommended.


Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

 A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560A, effective 870615 - 890110), Article 3630600, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED MEMBERS 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 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 | 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501027

    Original file (ND0501027.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND05-01027 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20050601. The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). During my absence (AWOL), a new Captain took over the “US S Fresno (LST-1182).” The old Captain was aware of the situation and he left no information or instruction to the new Captain as to what was going on in the ship’s office.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00406

    Original file (ND00-00406.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    880625: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86 (3 Specs): UA from unit; violation of UCMJ Article 92: disobeyed a lawful written order.Award: Forfeiture of $100 per month for 2 months (suspended for 6 months), restriction and extra duty for 30 days. MMFR (Applicant)'s defense counsel states in his appeal letter that the senior member was not a line officer; that with the other ships alongside in Bahrain as well as the USS LASALLE, an 0-4 line officer could have been obtained. After a...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00632

    Original file (ND00-00632.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00632 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000418, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. My life since being discharged.When you review my records, you will see that I had good marks and a good record leading up to the events that led to my discharge. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01444

    Original file (ND03-01444.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-01444 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030903. I WAS TOLD TO REPORT CAPTAIN MASS AND HE INFORMED ME THAT BECAUSE I HAD BEEN WRITTEN UP 3 TIMES AND THAT IT SHOWS A PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT AND HE RECOMMEND THAT I BE DISCHARGED UNDER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS. 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.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND0000986

    Original file (ND0000986.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-HTFN, USN Docket No. ND00-00986 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000802, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. Applicant did not object to separation.950224: Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse (use).

  • 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 | 2004_Navy | ND04-00612

    Original file (ND04-00612.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The discharge shall remain: UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600. I was young and the recruiter made a deal with me, that cost me my life. Commanding Officer’s comments: SR F_ (Applicant) has been extremely inconsistent since reporting on board in April of last year.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00006

    Original file (ND02-00006.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Age at Entry: 18 Years Contracted: 4 (24 months extension) Education Level: 12 AFQT: 92 Highest Rate: AQAA Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks): Performance: 2.50 (2) Behavior: 3.30 (2) OTA: 3.30 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/Misconduct - Pattern of misconduct, authority:...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00027

    Original file (ND99-00027.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I am asking for an upgrade in order to obtain the VA benefits I am a veteran who served proudly in time of war and the type of discharge I received, has left its mark against me. At this time, the applicant has not provided any documentation of good character and conduct. In issues 8 and 9, the applicant states that “medical or physical problems” and “certain other problems impaired my ability to serve.” A medical, diagnosis on active duty or during post-service, and whether proper or...