Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00911
Original file (ND99-00911.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-GMGSN, USN
Docket No. ND99-00911

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 990625, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to General/under Honorable conditions. The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. The applicant listed a VETERANS SERVICE OFFICER as his 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 - 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
Letter from applicant (2pgs)

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: USN                        850805 - 890803  HON
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     850329 - 850804  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 890804               Date of Discharge: 930120

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 03 05 17
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 23                          Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 25

 Highest Rate: GMG3

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 1.33 (3)    Behavior: 1.33 (3)                OTA: 1.66

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM

Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/Misconduct – Pattern of misconduct, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

900508:  Civil Conviction at the First Circuit Family Court, State of Hawaii, located in Honolulu, Hawaii for Abuse of a Household member (Hawaii Revised Statutes 709-906).
 Sent: Incarceration for 30 days with 23 days being suspended for a period of 1 year subject to the defendant remaining arrest and conviction free for a period of 1 year; and the defendant was ordered to participate with the Navy Family Advocacy Program for continued counseling and participation in an anger management program.

 900712:  Retention Warning from [USS CORONADO (AGF-11)]: Advised of deficiency (failed to obey lawful order, unauthorized absence, making false official statements.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

900712:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: UA 920525, 920601, 920608, 920629, violation of UCMJ Article 92: Failure to obey other lawful order.
         Award: Restriction and extra duty for 30 days, reduction to E-3. No indication of appeal in the record.

900718:  Civil Conviction at the First Circuit Family Court, State of Hawaii, located in Honolulu, Hawaii for Abuse of a Household Member (Hawaii Revised Statues 709-906).
         Sent: Incarceration for 30 days with 23 days being suspended for a period of 1 year subject to the defendant remaining arrest and conviction free for a period of 1 year; and the defendant was ordered to participate with the Navy Family Advocacy Program for continued counseling and participation in an anger management program.

920610:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: UA from his place of duty, to wit: NAVSTA Chapel, Pearl Harbor, HI, at 0900 until 1815, 920522; violation of UCMJ Article 89: (2 Specifications), Disrespectful toward a superior commissioned officer on 920522.
         Award: Forfeiture of $200 per month for 1 month (suspended for 3 months). No indication of appeal in the record.
920626:  Commanding Officer, Naval Station, Pearl Harbor notified applicant of intended recommendation for discharge under Other Than Honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a Pattern of misconduct, Commission of a serious offense and civilian conviction.
920629:          Applicant advised of his rights and having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ, Article 27B, elected to appear before an Administrative Discharge Board.
920810:  An Administrative Discharge Board, based upon a preponderance of the evidence and by unanimous vote, found that the applicant had committed misconduct due to a Pattern of misconduct, Commission of a serious offense, and civilian conviction, that the misconduct warranted separation, and recommended discharge under Other Than Honorable conditions.

921020:  Commanding officer recommended discharge under Other Than Honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a Pattern of misconduct, Commission of a serious offense and civilian conviction.

921218:  Applicant advised that his Admin Separation Board hearing, held 10 August 1992 was improperly convened in that the Senior Member must be a line officer serving in the grade of 0-4 or above. The Senior Member was a medical officer not a line officer. The applicant elected to accept the results of the Admin Separation Board from 10 August 1992, despite the deficiency noted and refused a newly convened Admin Separation Board.

930108:  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 930120 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.

 Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

 A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C, effective 15 Aug 91 until
04 Mar 93), 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 | 2002_Navy | ND02-00131

    Original file (ND02-00131.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00131 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 011018, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Applicant's letter to the Board dtd 01AUG06 Copy of DD Form 214 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: USNR...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00582

    Original file (ND02-00582.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00582 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020402, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. It is recommended that ENFR H_ (Applicant) receive a General discharge. 940420: BUPERS directed the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501341

    Original file (ND0501341.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. In the acknowledgement letter, the Applicant was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing. Specification: In that Postal Clerk Third Class M_ A. S_(Applicant), U.S. Navy, FISC Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, on active duty, did on or about 0715 040830 without authority absent himself from...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00878

    Original file (ND02-00878.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    No indication of appeal in the record.881213: USS WHIPPLE (FF 1062) notified Applicant of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and alcohol abuse rehabilitation failure.881213: Applicant advised of 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-01371

    Original file (ND04-01371.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    “And upgrade is needed for me to get veterans medical services for my heart disease agued during my military active duty. 920528: An Administrative Discharge Board, based upon a preponderance of the evidence and by unanimous vote, found that the Applicant had committed a serious offense and a pattern of misconduct, that the misconduct warranted separation, and recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions. The Veterans Administration determines eligibility for post-service...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00716

    Original file (ND99-00716.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    TWO MONTHS HAD PAST SINCE THE DEPLOYMENT OF THE USS RUEBEN JAMES, MY WIFE AND I HAD RECEIVED OUR FIRST BORN PLUS STILL WORKING ON IMPROVING OUR MARRIAGE SINCE I WAS HOME, WHILE DURING THIS TIME SUDDENLY THE ADMIRAL FROM THE BASE (PEARL HARBOR HAWAII) HAD SENT ORDERS FOR ME TO BE SENT ON DEPLOYMENT WITH THE USS INGERSOLL ON A SIX (6) MONTH DEPLOYMENT. THE PSYCHIATRIST HAD SEEN ME TWICE AND RECOMMENED TO THE ADMIRAL OF THE BASE THAT I WAS NOT FIT FOR DEPLOYMENT SO FROM THIS RECOMMENDATION I...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00585

    Original file (ND01-00585.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00585 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010327, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. P: Compazine 10 mg___, Bedrest for 24 hours.910215: A: Motion sickness. Applicant's statement dated July 18, 1991 found in service record.910820: Commanding officer recommended discharge honorable by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense and by reason of convenience of the government due to...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00838

    Original file (ND01-00838.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-YNSA, USN Docket No. ND01-00838 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010606, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00989

    Original file (ND00-00989.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-OSSN, USN Docket No. 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: “My discharge was based on one isolated incident out of 2 years continuous naval service with no previous disciplinary problems.” The applicants misconduct, violation...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600191

    Original file (ND0600191.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Please correct the enlistment code so I can reenlist in the military.”Additional issues submitted by Applicant’s counsel/representative (Disabled American Veterans): “Dear Chairperson: After a review of the Former Service Members (FSM) DD Form 293 Application for the Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the Armed Forces of the United States and all of evidence...