Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00687
Original file (ND99-00687.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-HN, USN
Docket No. ND9-00687

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 990426, 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 000207. 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 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:
Copy of DD Form 214
 Personal letter from applicant dated April 20, 1999

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: USN               910904 - 941116  HON
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     None

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 941117               Date of Discharge: 960426

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 01 05 10
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 22                          Years Contracted: 3

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 64

 Highest Rate: HN

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.90 (2)    Behavior: 3.90 (2)                OTA: 3.90

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: Navy “E” Ribbon, NDSM, SWASM, SSDR, NGCM.

 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 3630600.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

950918:  Counseling: Advised of deficiency (Personal indebtedness, personal conduct and inappropriate behavior while on liberty, not returning to work after being cleared for duty and was not in his BEQ room which violated his SIQ provisions), notified of corrective actions and assistance available.
951006:  Counseling: Advised of deficiency (Member wrote 7 bad checks to MWR Japan totaling $775.00, inappropriate personal conduct while on liberty under the influence of ETOH.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available.

960111:  Counseling: Advised of deficiency (Letter of indebtedness to the U.S, government in the amount of $1063.50), notified of corrective actions and assistance available.

960201:  Commanding Officer, Naval Hospital, Camp Lejeune, NC notified applicant of intended recommendation for discharge under Other Than Honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a set pattern of failure to pay just debts.

960201:          Applicant advised of his rights and having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ, Article 27B, elected to waive all rights except the right to submit a statement in his own behalf either verbally or in writing, to obtain copies of the documents used to support the basis for the separation and to have a minimum of 2 working days to respond to the Notice if Notification Procedure Proposed Action.
960312:  Commanding officer recommended discharge under Other Than Honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a Set Pattern of Failure to Pay Just Debts. Commanding Officer’s comments: “Recommend approval of the administrative separation in the case of HM3 M_ T. G_. Member is not essential to mission accomplishment at this command.

960410:  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 960426 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 introduced no decisional issues for consideration by the Board.

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, subsequent to leaving military service. The NDRB 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 to determine if proper procedures were followed. 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 did not provide any documentation of good character or conduct, which would warrant an upgrade to his discharge. The applicant is encouraged to establish a reputation of good character and document his accomplishments. Documentation to support any claim of good character is a must to receive any consideration based on post-service achievements . He remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, to discuss his post-service accomplishments, provided an application is received by the NDRB within fifteen years from the date of his discharge. Legal representation at the hearing is advisable.

 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 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 | 2004_Navy | ND04-00224

    Original file (ND04-00224.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :940719: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence, violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Dereliction of duties. No indication of appeal in the record.960416: USS NASSAU (LHA-4) notified Applicant of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-01137

    Original file (ND99-01137.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    880115: Counseling: Advised of deficiency (Responsibilities to pay debts. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 880223 under honorable conditions (general) for misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct (A). 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. 20310-1809The names, and votes of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-01163

    Original file (ND99-01163.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION After careful consideration, I determined that it was necessary to discharge MSSR (applicant) from the Naval service with a characterization of General. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 970221 General (under Honorable conditions) for misconduct due to a Pattern of misconduct (A).

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00531

    Original file (ND99-00531.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 980130 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct (A). After a thorough review of the records, 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.

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00745

    Original file (ND99-00745.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    No indication of appeal in the record.860213: Retention Warning from USS YORKTOWN: Advised of deficiency (Unsatisfactory personal and military behavior demonstrated by excessive use of alcohol, violation of curfew, liberty, and attempted jumping ship from USS Yellowstone to USS Yorktown), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.860725: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00617

    Original file (ND99-00617.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560A, Change 8 effective 21 Aug 89 until 14 Aug 91), Article 3630600, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT A PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00933

    Original file (ND02-00933.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The discharge shall remain: UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/Misconduct – commission of a serious offense, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600. No indication of appeal in the record.910828: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense as evidenced by CO's NJP awarded on 910828, for 37 days unauthorized absence and wrongful appropriation of government property...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00020

    Original file (ND00-00020.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The discharge shall remain: UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600. No indication of appeal in the record.960221: Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (Absence without leave, in that you failed to report for delinquent study of 30 January 1996. The applicant

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00757

    Original file (ND03-00757.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-00757 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030326. The Applicant requests the reason for the discharge be changed to financial instability. The NDRB is authorized, however, to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge to the extent such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review.