Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00872
Original file (ND99-00872.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-BMSA, USN
Docket No. ND99-00872

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 990603, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions. The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. The applicant did not list a representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 000331. 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, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

 I feel my discharge was caused by a very demotivating demoralizing duty station. I submitted several requests for a change of duty. My duty station was the USS VULCAN. I achieved the rank of BM3. I had excellent knowledge of rate, fire control, navigation, and first aid. I enjoyed my job immensely. I feel I am entitled to a discharge upgrade for the US Navy’s demoralizing duty station I was assigned.

 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):
        
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     820331 - 820404  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 820405               Date of Discharge: 850923

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 03 05 18
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 17                 Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 10                        AFQT: 56

 Highest Rate: BM3

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.40 (5)    Behavior: 3.10 (0)                OTA: 3.40

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: SSDR

Days of Unauthorized Absence: 03

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

820413:  Applicant signed statement of awareness of USN Drug Abuse Policy.
830718:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 134: Wrongful use of marijuana.
         Award: Forfeiture of $150 per month for 2 month(s), restriction and extra duty for 30 days, reduction to E-1. No indication of appeal in the record.

830805:  Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency ( Wrongful use of marijuana), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

831017:  Applicant notified of proposed Administrative Board Procedure Proposed Action.

831220:  Applicant screened by CAAC for illegal drug use. Diagnosed a drug abuser, not motivated for treatment/counseling.

840109:  Applicant advised of his rights and having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to appear before an Administrative Discharge Board.
840228:  An Administrative Discharge Board, based upon a preponderance of the evidence and by unanimous vote, found that the applicant had committed a serious offense, that the misconduct did not warrant separation, and recommended the applicant receive counseling for drug abuse.

840716:  Commanding Officer recommends retention supporting the findings of the Administrative Discharge Board.

840730:  CNMPC directs USS VULCAN issue discharge warning to applicant due to retention at Admin Board.

840801:  Retention Warning: Advised of deficiencies in performance, notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

841114:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 134: Wrongfully receive one case of stolen soda.
         Award: Forfeiture of $100 per month for 2 month(s), restriction and extra duty for 20 days. No indication of appeal in the record.
850614:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence from 0700, 4 Jun 85- 1106, 7 Jun 85.
         Violation of UCMJ Article 87: Missed Ship’s movement 7 Jun 85.
         Award: Forfeiture of $100 per month for 1month, reduction in rate (suspended for six months). Restriction and extra duty for 20 days. No indication of appeal in the record.
850815:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Failure to obey a lawful order of a Senior Petty Officer. Violation of UCMJ Article 112A: Wrongfully use marijuana and amphetamines.
 Award: 45 Days restriction and extra duties, forfeiture of $250 per month for 2 months and reduction in rate. No indication of appeal in record.
850819:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and misconduct due to drug abuse.
850819:          Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with council certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights.
850819:  Medical Officer, USS VULCAN (AR-5) states that applicant is poly drug user who is not drug dependant with poor potential for rehabilitation. Applicant is not recommended for further service.
850903:  Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and misconduct due to drug abuse.

850917:  CNMPC 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 850923 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 applicant’s issue states: “I feel my discharge was caused by a very demotivating demoralizing duty station. I submitted several requests for a change of duty. My duty station was the USS VULCAN. I achieved the rank of BM3. I had excellent knowledge of rate, fire control, navigation, and first aid. I enjoyed my job immensely. I feel I am entitled to a discharge upgrade for the US Navy’s demoralizing duty station I was assigned.” The NDRB found no evidence in the applicant’s service record to support this issue. Additionally he provided no post service documentation for the Board to consider. Relief is 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 15560C), Change 9, effective
22 Jul 94 until 02 Oct 96, Article 3630600, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL 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 | 2002_Navy | ND02-01281

    Original file (ND02-01281.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-01281 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 20020910, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. No indication of appeal in the record.871204: Vacate suspended restriction for 20 days, reduction to BMSN awarded at CO's NJP dated 871029 due to continued misconduct.871204: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 91: Insubordinate conduct toward officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer. PART III – RATIONALE...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00073

    Original file (ND00-00073.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00073 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 991019, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION No indication of appeal in the record.860107: Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00040

    Original file (ND01-00040.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00040 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 001016, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable and the reason for the discharge be changed to reenlistment eligible RE-1. This is a request to have the review board evaluate my service record. The Board found the applicant’s discharge accurately described his service.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00003

    Original file (ND04-00003.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. 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): Inactive: USNR (DEP) None Active: USN None Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 860918 Date of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00558

    Original file (ND01-00558.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. Deserter UA from USS DETROIT since 0700, 940418. 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 issue states: “I feel that my service record, and accomplishments can aid to the discharge decision of this appeal.” The NDRB reviewed the applicant’s service record and found that the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-01255

    Original file (ND02-01255.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    870529: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: (3 Specifications) , Specification 1 : In that SNM, on active duty, USS CHANDLER (DDG-996), did, on or about 0800, 870516, without authority, absent himself from his unit, to wit: USS CHANDLER (DDG-996) and did remain so absent until on or about 1130, 870516; Specification 2 : In that SNM, on active duty, USS CHANDLER (DDG-996), did, on or about 0500, 870517, without authority, absent himself from his unit, to wit: USS CHANDLER (DDG-996) and did...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00133

    Original file (ND99-00133.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    851206: Placed on limited duty by Medical Board, Naval Hospital Bethesda, MD until 860402, at which time he will be reevaluated. No indication of appeal in the record860414: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.860501: SNM placed on second period of limited duty by Medical Board, Naval Hospital Bethesda until 861101. 860624: An Administrative Discharge Board,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00263

    Original file (ND01-00263.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    There were two shipmates on the top level, I told them to tell Seaman C_ that I was on level three waiting for him if they saw him. I told them to go to medical and tell them man down. That was the last time I saw Seaman C_ until I was in Norfolk waiting discharge.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00524

    Original file (ND01-00524.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 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: USN None Inactive: USNR (DEP) 880323 - 880410 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 880411 Date of Discharge: 940719 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 05 04 04 Inactive: None PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-01008

    Original file (ND99-01008.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 (C and D).In the applicant’s attached letter, the Board sited the following issues: Youth and immaturity, post-service achievements (hard working family man), and difficulty explaining discharge characterization to potential employers. The NDRB reviews the propriety (did the Navy follow its own rules in processing the...