Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00707
Original file (ND99-00707.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-MSSR
Docket No. ND99-00707

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 990503, 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, 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 3630605.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues (verbatim)
1. I have no excuses for using bad language or being AWOL. I had a bad temper when I was young. I consider my poor judgement to be a folly of my youth that will not be repeated again in my lifetime.

Please also instruct me in upgrading of RE codes.

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

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: USN                        000000 - 000000  HON
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     000000 - 000000  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 931004               Date of Discharge: 970804

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 03 09 04
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 18                          Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 32

 Highest Rate: MSSN

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 2.93 (3)    Behavior: 2.86 (3)                OTA: 2.97

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM, SSDR, SWASM/Bronze Star

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: 1

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 3630605.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :
950328:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 128: Assault; violation of UCMJ Article 134: Disorderly conduct.
         Award: Forfeiture of $200 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 20 days. No indication of appeal in the record.
960503:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Gone from appointed place of duty on 22 and 27 Nov 95.
         Award: Restriction and extra duty for 15 days, reduction to E-2 (suspended for 6 months). No indication of appeal in the record.

970421:  SCM for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: 1 spec UA from field day 97JAN14, 5 specs UA from restricted muster 97MAR23, 97APR05, 97APR06, 97APR08, 97APR09; violation of UCMJ Article 87: negligently missing movement of USS ABRAHAM LINCOLN 97MAR06; violation of UCMJ Article 91: willfully disobeying a lawful order 97FEB17; violation of UCMJ Article 117: wrongfully use provoking words 97FEB03.
         Award: Reduction to E-1. Confinement for 25 days. No indication of appeal in the record.

970609:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.
970609:          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.

970620:  Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.

970702:  COMCRUDESGRU THREE directed the applicant's 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 970804 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (A and B). The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (C). After a thorough review of the records, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper and equitable (D and E).

In issue 1, the applicant states that he “has no excuses for using bad language or being AWOL.” The Board finds the applicant also has no excuses for other violations of the UCMJ to include assault, disorderly conduct, negligently missing ship’s movement, and willfully disobeying a lawful order. Relief denied.

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.

Concerning a change in reenlistment code, the NDRB has no authority to change reenlistment codes or make recommendations to permit reentry into the naval service or any other of the Armed Forces. This matter is under the jurisdiction of: The Board For Correction of Naval Records, Department of the Navy, Washington DC 20370-5100.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

 A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 14, effective
03 Oct 96 until 971212, Article 3630605, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT – COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE.

B. In Appendix 12 of the Manual for Courts-Martial, a punitive discharge is authorized for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Article 87, for negligently missing ship’s movement, if adjudged at a Special or General Court Martial.

C. 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.

D. 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.

E. 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 | 1999_Navy | ND99-00589

    Original file (ND99-00589.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I strongly recommend that Seaman Recruit_____ be separated immediately from the Naval Service under Other Than Honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense. 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 (D and E).In response to applicant’s issues 1-3, relevant and material facts stated in a court-martial specification are presumed...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00764

    Original file (ND04-00764.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION At this time, the Applicant has not provided verifiable documentation of good character and conduct to mitigate his misconduct while on active duty.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 | 2003_Navy | ND03-01374

    Original file (ND03-01374.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. NOT REQUIRED FOR COSO] 990926: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense and misconduct due to drug abuse.990926: Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult, elected to waive all rights except the right to...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00118

    Original file (ND03-00118.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. (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 this application.” Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant’s DD Form 214...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-01073

    Original file (ND99-01073.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 (D and E).The applicant introduced no decisional issues for consideration by the Board. 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,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00098

    Original file (ND99-00098.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 971030 with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (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 desires to upgrade his discharge in order to obtain Montgomery GI Bill...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00486

    Original file (ND99-00486.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-ADAA, USN Docket No. Specification 1: Unauthorized absence on 24 March 1997 to 29 April 1997 (13 days). I recommend that ADAA (applicant) be separated from the naval service with an Other Than Honorable Conditions.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-01021

    Original file (ND01-01021.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 Statement from Navy Exchange Service Command, Virginia Beach, VA PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: USNR (DEP) 950331 - 950522 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 950523 Date of Discharge: 990517 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active:...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00494

    Original file (ND01-00494.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00494 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010306, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable and the reason for the discharge be changed to convenience of the government. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION On this basis, he petitions the Board’s relief with re characterization of discharge to full honorable and a narrative reason upgrade to convenience of the government.” While the NDRB is...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01448

    Original file (ND03-01448.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable or entry-level separation or uncharacterized and the reason for the discharge be changed to “convenience of the government.” The Applicant requests a personal appearance hearing before the board in the Washington National Capital Region. In the acknowledgement letter, the Applicant was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary review prior...