Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00887
Original file (ND99-00887.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-CTOSN, USN
Docket No. ND99-00887

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 990618, 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 listed American Legion as her 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 – commission of a serious offense, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

 1. I believe I was prejudiced against for turning down multiple offers to “go party cause I could afford it.” I did not want to get hooked up w/a group that had bad habits. I also refused to pay for their (drinks “lunch”) or give out loans.

2. (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 her application.
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)     850816 - 860126  COG
Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 860127               Date of Discharge: 891127

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 03 10 00
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 18                          Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 68

 Highest Rate: XX3

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.40 (4)    Behavior: 3.50 (4)                OTA : 3.40

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: None

Days of Unauthorized Absence: 02

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 :

890329:  Applicant issued discharge warning due to unauthorized absence. Advised on corrective actions and available assistance through the chain of command.

890410:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence from 0700, 890327 to 0730, 890330.
         Award: Forfeiture of $391 per month for 1 month, Reduction in rate to E-2. No indication of appeal in the record.
890410:  Applicant issued discharge warning due to unauthorized absence. Advised on corrective actions and available assistance through the chain of command.

890522:  Suspended punishment from NJP on 890410 vacated this date due to continued misconduct.

890815:  Special Court Martial: Violation of UCMJ Article 107: Falsely signing a variable housing allowance certificate on 890503.
Award: 60 Days restriction, Forfeiture of 150.00$ Mo for 4 Months, Reduction in rate to E-1, Pay a fine of 750.00$.
891106:  Judge Advocate’s Review on Special Court Martial found the sentence legal and noted no allegations of error.

890911:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.
890912:          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.
891023:  Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.

891113:  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 891127 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).
1. The NDRB found no evidence in the record nor did the applicant provide any supporting documents to support this issue. Relief not warranted.

2.       The applicant did not provide any documentation regarding her post service conduct for the Board to consider. 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. Relief not warranted.

3.       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 15560A), Change 8, effective
21 Aug 89 until 14 Aug 91, 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 | 2003_Navy | ND03-01155

    Original file (ND03-01155.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board’s letter was returned. 891116: 30 days Correctional Custody awarded at nonjudicial punishment on 2Oct89 is hereby mitigated to 30 days restriction and 30 days extra duties per order of the CO, USS NEW ORLEANS (LPH 11). Verifiable proof of any post-service accomplishments must be provided in order for the Applicant to claim post-service conduct and behavior as a reason to upgrade a less than honorable discharge.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00177

    Original file (ND00-00177.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00177 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. The applicant’s fifth issue states: “We ask the Board to consider the applicant's case IAW SECNAV Instruction 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (MDR 1984), enclosure (1) chapter 9, paragraph 9.2, Propriety of Discharge.” The NDRB found no procedural errors in...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-01082

    Original file (ND01-01082.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).The applicant requested a change in discharge due to his post service conduct. The applicant is eligible for a personal appearance hearing provided the application is received within 15 years from the date of discharge. PART IV - INFORMATION FOR THE APPLICANT If you believe that the decision in your case is...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00132

    Original file (ND00-00132.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: None Inactive: USNR (DEP) 900323 - 900716 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 900717 Date of Discharge: 940712 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 03 11 26 Inactive: None Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00522

    Original file (ND00-00522.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION (EQUITY ISSUE) As the documentary evidence of record supports, this former member opines that his post-service conduct has been sufficiently creditable to warrant the Board’s clemency relief as authorized under provisions of SECNAVINST 5420.174C, enclosure (1), paragraph 9.3. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01237

    Original file (ND03-01237.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable and the reason for the discharge be changed to “Sec Auth.” The Applicant requests a personal appearance hearing discharge review before the Board in the Washington National Capital Region. The applicant’s misconduct, warranting separation for misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and the commission of a serious offense, is clearly documented in the service record. As of this...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-01201

    Original file (ND02-01201.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-01201 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020820, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. discharge. Naval Council of Personnel Boards Attn: Naval Discharge Review Board 720 Kennon Street SE Rm 309 Washington Navy Yard DC 20374-5023

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00267

    Original file (ND01-00267.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Decision A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 010601. Issues Prior to the documentary discharge review, the applicant introduced no issues as block 8 on the DD Form 293 is blank. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00485

    Original file (ND99-00485.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION 900724: Vacate forfeiture and reduction awarded at CO's NJP dated 8Mar90 due to continued misconduct. 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 but inequitable (D and E).In response to applicant’s issue 1, the Board after reviewing the applicant’s post-service conduct, grants clemency relief as authorized under provisions of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00672

    Original file (ND99-00672.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Appeal denied 940311.940524: 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 pattern of misconduct.940603: Applicant advised of his rights and having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to appear before an Administrative Discharge Board. 940623: An Administrative Discharge Board, based upon a preponderance of the evidence and by unanimous...