Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00559
Original file (ND99-00559.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-RMSR, USN
Docket No. ND99-00559

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 990312, 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 000616. 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 3630600.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

 1. How is it that a 4.0 RM3 goes from honorable discharge and reenlistment to admin separation and being an E-1 again.

2. I was not properly handled during the closing of my new command FACSFAC VA CAPE in Virginia Beach, VA. I seemingly fell through the cracks. By the time someone realized I was there it was too late. I was in a new area with no car, no support system and absolutely no guidance. Higher ranking petty officers were simply covering their on butts by shifting blame. How could I be brought into the command if I didn't know where to go.

 Documentation
Only the applicant's medical and service records were considered, as applicant did not provide additional documentation.

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: USN               890825 - 930307  HON
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     890824 - 890824  COG
                                             890203 - 890821  ELS (Did not graduate H.S.)

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 930308      Date of Discharge: 950505*
 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 02 01 28

Age at Entry: 23                          Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 11                        AFQT: 50

 Highest Rate: RM3

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.6 (2)     Behavior: 3.8 (2)                 OTA: 3.8

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: None

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: 7


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 :

930308:  Reenlisted for a term of four years at Treasure Island, CA.

 940307:  Issued Temporary Additional Duty from NTCC Oceana (VACAPES) to NTCC Breezy Point, with estimated date of return as 05SEP94.
940310:  Counseled that he failed to meet the official PRT Navy standards and being placed on the mandatory remedial PT program. Commencement date is 14 March 1994 and training held Monday thru Friday at 0700. Advised of responsibility to report three times each week, on any three days of own choosing.

940310:  Retention Warning: Failed to meet the Physical Readiness Standards and enrolled in command's Physical Conditioning Program. Notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.
940412:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: did on or about 1300, 25 Jan 94, without authority, absent himself from his organization, to wit: Naval Telecommunications Center Oceana, Virginia Beach, VA and did remain so absent until on or aobut 1030, 01 FEB 94 (7 days).
         Award: Admonition in writing, extra duty for 14 days, reduction to E-3 (suspended for six months). No indication of appeal in the record.
940412:  Counseling concerning non-support of dependents, notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.
9404XX:  Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (violation of UCMJ, Article 86), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

940429:  Counseling concerning performance and responsibilities (failed to attend remedial physical conditioning program, as directed), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

940520:  Sunrise Auto &Cycle Sales Yamaha advised CO of applicant's indebtedness and applicant's lack of payment.

940527:  Counseling concerning responsibilities (failed seabag inspection - numerous items missing), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

940602:  Punishment of reduction in rate suspended at NJP on 12APR94 vacated this date due to continued misconduct.

940602:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92 (2 specs): Spec 1 - failed to report for extra duty as assigned by memo dtd 18APR94, as awarded by OIC's mast held on 12APR94, on 4MAY94, Spec 2 - did absent himself from appointed place of duty, to wit: Powers Hall, Naval Station, for a dress white inspection, which he know was ordered by LT J_, Billeting Dept. Division Officer.
         Award: Admonition in writing, restriction and extra duty for 14 days, reduction to E-2 (suspended for 6 months). No indication of appeal in the record.

940615:  Retention Warning: Failed to meet the Physical Readiness Standards (May 94 semi-annual PRT/BF) and enrolled in command's Physical Conditioning Program. Notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.
940615:  Counseled concerning private indebtedness (failure to pay debt), notified of corrective action (make payment of $90.00 still own $110), advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning. NOTE: As of 4 Aug 94, member hasn't produce receipt for $90.00 & $110.00, he claims he has paid. He was told to bring in receipts 1 Aug 94.
9406XX:  Counseled that he failed to meet the official PRT Navy standards and being placed on the mandatory remedial PT program. Commencement date is 27 June 1994 and training held Monday thru Friday at 0700. Advised of responsibility to report three times each week, on any three days of own choosing.

940630:  Counseling concerning personal behavior and responsibilities (failed to attend remedial physical conditioning program, as directed), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

940805:  Counseling concerning responsibilities (failed seabag re-inspection - numerous items missing or couldn't find them due to clothes piled up at bottom of locker), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.
940810:  Retention Warning from NTCC Breezy Point, Norfolk, VA: Advised of deficiency (violation of UCMJ Article 86 - UA; violation of Article 92 - failure to obey order or regulation - 2 specs) and excessive indebtedness to Sunrise Auto & Cycle Sales Yamaha - letter of 20 May 94), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

940926:  Punishment of reduction in rate suspended at 94JUN02 NJP vacated this date due to continued misconduct.

940926:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92: on or about 12 May, 27 July and 17 August 1994, fail to obey a lawful general regulation, to wit: U.S. Navy Uniform Regulation 7101.3 by failing three seabag inspections;
Violation of UCMJ Article 92 (7 Specs):
Spec 1 - having knowledge of a lawful order issued by RM2 S_ M. L_, to wit: RM2 L_'s memo dated 15 Jun 94, an order which it was his duty to obey, did from 27 June 94 to 1 Jul 94, fail to obey the same by failing to participate in the command physical conditioning program;
Spec 2 - having knowledge of a lawful order issued by RM2 S_ M. L_, to wit: RM2 L_'s memo dated 15 Jun 94, an order which it was his duty to obey, did from 4 July 94 to 8 Jul 94 fail to obey the same by failing to participate in the command physical conditioning program;
Spec 3 - having knowledge of a lawful order issued by RM2 S_ M. L_, to wit: RM2 L_'s memo dated 15 Jun 94, an order which it was his duty to obey, did, from 18 Jul 94 to 22 Jul 94, fail to obey the same by failing to participate in the command physical conditioning program;
Spec 4 - having knowledge of a lawful order issued by RM2 S_ M. L_, to wit: RM2 L_'s memo dated 15 Jun 94, an order which it was his duty to obey, did from 24 Jul 94 to 29 Jul 94, fail to obey the same by failing to participate in the command physical conditioning program;
Spec 5 - having knowledge of a lawful order issued by RM2 S_ M. L_, to wit: RM2 L_'s memo dated 15 Jun 94, an order which it was his duty to obey, did from 1 Aug 94 to 5 Aug 94, fail to obey the same by failing to participate in the command physical conditioning program;
Spec 6 - having knowledge of a lawful order issued by RM2 S_ M. L_, to wit: RM2 L_'s memo dated 15 Jun 94, an order which it was his duty to obey, did from 8 Aug 94 to 12 Aug 94, fail to obey the same by failing to participate in the command physical conditioning program;
Spec 7 - having knowledge of a lawful order issued by RM2 S_ M. L_, to wit: RM2 L_'s memo dated 15 Jun 94, an order which it was his duty to obey, did from 15 Aug 94 to 19 Aug 94, fail to obey the same by failing to participate in the command physical conditioning program.
         Award: Admonition in writing, restriction and extra duty for 14 days, reduction to E-1. No indication of appeal in the record.
941111:  NTCC received letter of indebtedness from ICO Services Inc, Virginia Beach, VA.
941122:  CO, Naval Computer and Telecommunications Area Master Station LANT notified applicant of intended recommendation for discharge by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and due to commission of serious offense and such discharge may be under other than honorable conditions.
941206:  Applicant advised of his rights and having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to appear before an Administrative Discharge Board.
950120:  An Administrative Discharge Board, by unanimous vote, found that the applicant had committed misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct; had committed misconduct due to a commission of a serious offense; however, member did not receive adequate support from the chain of command to possibly preclude this misconduct from occurring. Board, by unanimous vote, recommended that member be separated by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct with a General discharge.

950330:  Commanding officer recommended discharge with a General (under honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and by reason of commission of a serious offense. Commanding officer’s comments (verbatim): "When RMSR (Applicant) was absent from his assigned place of duty in January 1994 for seven days, he was a Third class Petty Officer with more than five years experience in the Naval Service; he was completely aware of reporting procedures. He deliberately failed to report to his assigned place of duty because he decided his personal problems took precedence over his military responsibilities. His lax attitude regarding minimum seabag requirements shows the little pride he has for the navy and his disregard for regulations. RMSR (Applicant) is completely responsible for his failure to attend remedial PT and participate in official PRTs. His chain of command clearly advised him of remedial PT sessions as well as the dates of all official PRTs. RMSR (Applicant) refuses to accept responsibility for his deficiencies; he routinely places blame on others. He has a history of failure to obey oral or written regulations and orders. This behavior is not acceptable and must not be tolerated. I strongly recommend RMSR (Applicant) be separated from the Naval Service with a characterization of service as General (Under Honorable Conditions). I do not recommend h9im for transfer to the Individual Ready Reserve."

950515:  BUPERS directed the applicant's discharge with a General (Under 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 950505 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’s two issues presented to the NDRB were non decisional. The NDRB found no evidence to substantiate the applicant’s issues. Relief is denied.
Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

 A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C, Change 9, effective
22 Jul 94 until 02 Oct 96), Article 3630600, 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 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 view DoD Directive 1332.28 and other Decisional Documents by going online at “ afls14.jag.af.mil ”.

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      


Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501521

    Original file (ND0501521.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable and the Narrative Reason for Separation be changed to “Hardship/Financial.” The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review. He has a long pattern of acting on his intent regardless of the directing of his command. No indication of appeal in the record.020819: DD Form 214: Applicant discharged General (Under Honorable Conditions) with narrative reason of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600367

    Original file (ND0600367.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Therefore, it requested that the Board consider the mitigating and extenuating circumstances in this case, to include the impetuosity of his youth, and grant a favorable decision.If a favorable decision can not be granted at this time, it is requested that the Applicant be scheduled for a future Hearing.DAV” Documentation In addition to the service record, the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00174

    Original file (ND00-00174.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00174 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 991117, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. 950221: Vacate suspended forfeiture awarded at CO's NJP dated 29Nov94 due to continued misconduct.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600121

    Original file (ND0600121.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Documentation Only the service was reviewed. 900814: Applicant to unauthorized absence at 0730 on 900814.900816: Applicant from unauthorized absence at 0730 on 900816 (2 days/returned).900816: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: (9 specs),Specification 1: In that SR S_ R_ (Applicant), USN, USS MIDWAY, on active duty, did, on board USS MIDWAY, at or about 0900, 11...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00392

    Original file (ND04-00392.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In accordance with 32 C.F.R., section 724.166, and SECNAVINST 5420.174C, enclosure (1), paragraph 1.16, The American Legion submits to the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB or Board) the above issue and following statement in supplement to the Applicant’s petition. No indication of appeal in the record.920723: Retention Warning from USS CONNOLY: Advised of deficiency (CO’s NJP’s of 920413 and 920613) notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of...

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0501458

    Original file (MD0501458.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION Applicant chose not to make a statement.040109: Acknowledged understanding of eligibility but not recommended for promotion to Cpl for the month of Feb 04 due to Pending Disciplinary Charges/Non-judicial Punishment. Article 92: Specification 1: In that Lance Corporal B_ F. O_(Applicant), U.S. Marine Corps, on active duty, did, at Camp Pendleton, CA, on or about 11 December 2003, violate a lawful general order, to wit: paragraph 6310.c of Base...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00087

    Original file (ND03-00087.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In the acknowledgement letter, the Applicant was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a record review prior to any personal appearance hearing. Though Navy regulations only permit conditional waivers for General discharges not Honorable discharges, BM2 M_'s (Applicant) designated military lawyer did not know this and provided erroneous advice to BM2 M_ (Applicant). Navy regulations required that for misconduct to be a serious offense it must be an offense...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600813

    Original file (ND0600813.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. ” 910614: BUPERS denied approval of recommendation for separation with characterization of service as under other than honorable conditions. The Applicant may, however, petition the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR), 2 Navy Annex, Washington, DC 20370-5100, concerning a change in the characterization of Naval service, if he desires further review of his case.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600366

    Original file (ND0600366.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND06-00366 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20051228. The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board’s voted3 to 2 that the discharge shall change to: GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS) BY REASON OF PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00201

    Original file (ND02-00201.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Decision A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 020815. 950512: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86 (2 specs): (1) Unauthorized absence 0730, 12Mar95 - 1107, 28Mar95 (16 days/apprehended), (2) Unauthorized absence 17Apr95 - 19Apr95 (2 days/apprehended), violation of UCMJ, Article 87 (2 specs): (1) Missing movement through design on 12Mar95, (2) Missing movement through design on 26Mar95, Award: Restriction for 30 days, reduction to ABEAN, oral reprimand. In...