Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00653
Original file (ND99-00653.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-FR, USN
Docket No. ND99-00653

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 990414, 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 list any representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 000121. 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.       Charged with possession of illegal alcohol aboard a naval vessel.
2.       At the time I brought this alcohol aboard ship my judgement was not good as I was intoxicated.

3.       The possession of the alcohol beverage was identified due to a random security check.
4.       Please see copy of statement mailed to the VA. This says what happened and I tried to explain how I have changed and that I am much more responsible now.
 I am urging you to upgrade my type of discharge because I believe that I have proven that by my lifestyle that I am deserving of this.
Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
Copy of DD Form 214.
Certified copy of criminal record check.
Statement by R___ W____, former employer – Turbo Conveyor
Statement by A___ C_____, Production Supervisor- Freightliner
Copy of statement by applicant submitted to VA Housing Authority

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: USN                        None
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     850829 - 851105  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 851105               Date of Discharge: 880115

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 02 02 11
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 18                          Years Contracted: 3

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 27

 Highest Rate: FN

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.2 (1)     Behavior: 3.0(1)                  OTA: 3.1 (4.0 scale)

Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: None

Days of Unauthorized Absence: 17

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 :

861212:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence, violation of UCMJ Article 87: Missing ship’s movement.
         Award: restriction and extra duty for 30 days, reduction to E-2. No indication of appeal in the record.
870409:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 128: Assault consummated by battery.
         Award: Forfeiture of $150 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 14 days, reduction to E-1(suspended for six months). No indication of appeal in the record.
870703:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92: failure to obey a lawful general order.
         Award: Forfeiture of $329 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to E-1. No indication of appeal in the record.

870715:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.
870721:          Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights.
870803:  Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 880115 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 Board found the applicant’s first three issues not germane to the propriety and equity of the applicant’s discharge. The Board found nothing in the records, nor did the applicant provide anything to indicate or to show that there exists an error of fact, law or procedure, or discretion associated with his discharge at the time of its issuance, and that his rights were prejudiced thereby. Relief denied.

 The applicant submitted the following as issue 4: (EQUITY ISSUE) This former member further requests that the Board include provisions of SECNAVINST 5420.174C., enclosure (1), Chapter 9, as it pertains to post-service conduct, in assessing the merits of his application. The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge (B, Part IV). However, 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, is considered. The applicant provided two letters of recommendation from his employers as documentation of his post-service. The applicant's efforts need to be more encompassing than those provided. The applicant should have produced evidence of continuing educational pursuits, a verifiable employment record, and documentation of community service in order for consideration for clemency based on post-service conduct. At this time the applicant has not provided sufficient documentation of good character and conduct. Therefore no relief will be granted. He is encouraged to continue with his pursuits and is reminded that he is eligible for a personal appearance hearing provided the application is received within 15 years from the date of discharge. Relief denied.


Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

 A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560A), effective 15 Jun 87 until
10 Jan 89, Article 3630600, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED MEMBERS 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 | 2004_Navy | ND04-00114

    Original file (ND04-00114.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND04-00114 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20031022. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. I knew someone who worked there and for this reason he hated me and told me “we don’t want your kind in this Navy.”

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00455

    Original file (ND00-00455.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00455 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000229, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. This is not an issue for which the Board will grant relief.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00007

    Original file (ND00-00007.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00007 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 991001, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to Honorable. My name is (applicant). The applicant claims he was young and dumb, made a big mistake (in reference to his misconduct), he’s getting married, is employed and sorry for his misconduct.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00166

    Original file (ND01-00166.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00166 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 001127, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. Relief is denied.The applicant’s second issue states: “The truth is I had requested 4 times with a request chit to be discharged from the service prior to my Captains Masts. My request is to have an honorable discharge, Thank you.” The Board carefully reviewed the applicant’s service record and found no impropriety or...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00731

    Original file (ND03-00731.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-00731 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030319. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. 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 | 2001_Navy | ND01-01069

    Original file (ND01-01069.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Very Respectfully, Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 Copy of neuropsychological and vocational evaluation dated June 17, 2001 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: USNR (DEP) 861224 - 861229 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 861230 Date of Discharge: 890721 Length of Service...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00606

    Original file (ND03-00606.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. I am a much more responsible person and to be a part of the Army (to get that second chance) would be an honor.” Issues submitted by Applicant’s counsel/representative, the American Legion:1. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00034

    Original file (ND03-00034.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I believe that my discharge, and its characterization, was based upon administrative expedience and my limited time aboard, rather than my potential for further service to the Navy. At this time, the applicant has not provided sufficient documentation for the Board to consider. 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 | 2002_Navy | ND02-00777

    Original file (ND02-00777.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:None. 960503: BUPERS directed the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense. 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 | 2001_Navy | ND01-00363

    Original file (ND01-00363.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:None PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: USN 900912 - 940825 HON Inactive: USNR (DEP) 900326 - 900911 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 940826 Date of Discharge: 960508 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 01 04 13 Inactive: None After a thorough review of the...