Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-01008
Original file (ND99-01008.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-AR, USN
Docket No. ND99-01008

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 990721, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to Honorable or General/under Honorable conditions and the reason for the discharge be changed to or change Re-code for re-enlistment in the Reserves. 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 000417. 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

1. Please see attached.

 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's father
Copy of mother's death certificate
Letter from applicant to the President dated February 22, 1999
Letter from Office of the Secretary to applicant dated April 5, 1999

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: None
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     850118 - 850818  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 850819               Date of Discharge: 870609

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 01 09 22
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 17                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 38

 Highest Rate: AA

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 2.40 (3)    Behavior: 2.33 (3)                OTA: 2.00

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: SSDR

Days of Unauthorized Absence: 17

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 :

860110:  Retention Warning from Naval Air Technical Training Center, Naval Air Station, Memphis, Millington, TN: Advised of deficiency (Violation Article 92 (2 specifications), violation Article 86.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.
860113:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86 (2 specs): (1) Unauthorized absence 0645-1145, 10DEC85, (2) Unauthorized absence 0615-0650 13DEC85, violation of UCMJ Article 92 (3 specs): (1) Failure to obey a lawful order on 7DEC84, (2) Failure to obey a lawful order on 10DEC85, (3) Failure to obey a lawful order on 13DEC85.
         Award: Forfeiture of $149 per month for 1 month, extra duty for 7 days. No indication of appeal in the record.

870128:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86 (2 specs): (1) Unauthorized absence 0730, 8JAN87 to 2200, 11JAN87 (3 days/surrendered), (2) Unauthorized absence 0745, 16JAN87 to 0745, 21JAN87 (5 days/ surrendered).
         Award: Restriction for 20 days, reduction to AR. No indication of appeal in the record.

870210:  Counseling warning. [Extracted from COs message dated 870601].
870324:  Drug and Alcohol Abuse Report: Marijuana abuse, less than monthly, ashore off duty, command directed urinalysis January 1987. SAC found applicant not dependent and recommended Level I treatment. Commanding officer recommended retention. Command directed urinalysis, no NJP required. Place on urinalysis and referred to NADSAP.
870521:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86 (6 specs): (1) Unauthorized absence from 0730, 9APR87 to 2344, 16APR87 (7 days/surrendered), (2) Unauthorized absence from 0730, 24APR87 to 0715, 27APR87 (2 days/ surrendered), (3) Unauthorized absence from place of duty on 10MAY87, (4) Unauthorized absence from place of duty on 12MAY87, (5) Unauthorized absence from place of duty on 13MAY87, (6) Unauthorized absence on 18MAY87, violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Dereliction of duty on 11MAY87, violation of UCMJ, Article 111: Use of cocaine on 16APR87.
         Award: Forfeiture of $329 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days. No indication of appeal in the record.
870523:  USS FORRESTAL (CV 59) notified applicant of intended recommendation for discharge under Other Than Honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a Pattern of misconduct as evidenced by three or more punishments under the UCMJ within the current enlistment and misconduct due to drug abuse as evidenced by wrongful use of cocaine on 16 April 1987.
870523:  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.
870523:  Medical Evaluation: There is no evidence of neurotic or psychotic disorder. There is no evidence of physiologic or psychologic addiction to drugs or alcohol. Applicant is not drug or alcohol dependent.
870601:  Commanding officer recommended discharge under Other than Honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a Pattern of misconduct and drug abuse.

870606:  CNMPC 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 870609 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).

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. 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 enough documentation of good character or conduct, which would warrant an upgrade to his discharge. The applicant is encouraged to continue 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. Relief denied.

The applicant requested the reason for discharge be changed for re-enlistment in the Reserves. The Board is under no obligation to upgrade an individual’s discharge for the purpose of re-entering any branch of military service. The discharge was proper and equitable. Relief denied.

 Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

 A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560, Change 7/86, effective 15 Dec 86 until 14 Jun 87), Article 3630600, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED MEMBERS 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 | ND99-00127

    Original file (ND99-00127.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. No indication of appeal in the record.830721: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92 (2 specs): Disobeying a lawful order on 30Jun83 and 1Jul83 Award: Restriction and extra duty for 15 days, reduction to ENFA. 850525: Applicant to unauthorized absence, 1430, 85May25.850529: Applicant from unauthorized absence 2230, 86May29...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00640

    Original file (ND99-00640.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    My discharge was improper because it was based on 8 days of time lost during my 3 years 1 month 21 days of service with no other adverse action. 841015: Surrendered on board at 0715 (3 days). No indication of appeal in the record.841101: Retention Warning from USS CANOPUS: Advised of deficiency (violation of UCMJ Article 92 - disobeying a lawful order, disrespect to a petty officer and failure to obey order/regulation), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00176

    Original file (ND99-00176.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Unauthorized absence1245, 7Apr84.840424: Substance Abuse Report: Marijuana abuse, less than monthly, Jan80-Mar84, ashore off duty, urinalysis. 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 the applicant’s issue 1 of post-service clemency, the Board found that the applicant’s post-service conduct was not sufficient to warrant an upgrade. The...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00427

    Original file (ND00-00427.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    No indication of appeal in the record.890203: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Failure to go to appointed place of duty, to wit: four extra duty musters on 31Jan89, 1 Feb89, and 2Feb89. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 890905 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct (A). After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00861

    Original file (ND01-00861.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00861 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010614, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION Issues I am requesting an upgrade based on the following 1. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged, in absentia, on 871014 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to a...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00260

    Original file (ND99-00260.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In the acknowledgement letter to the applicant, he was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary review prior to any appearance hearing. ]900611: USS STEPHEN W. GROVES (FFG 29) notified applicant of intended recommendation for discharge under Other Than Honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a Pattern of Misconduct as evidenced by 26 Aug 89 award of CO’s NJP for violation of Article 86 (2 specs), Unauthorized absence (1 days, 22 hours,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00982

    Original file (ND02-00982.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant's DD Form 214 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: None Active: None Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 870114 Date of Discharge: 881208 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 01 02 25 Inactive: 00 07 29 The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00488

    Original file (ND02-00488.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 Credit information sheet (4 pages)Copy of CDLEmployment history (3 pages) Police record checkFoster PRIDE training certificateLetter of recommendation from C_ E. P_ PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: USNR (DEP) 860930 - 861020 COG Period of Service Under Review...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-01046

    Original file (ND99-01046.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In the acknowledgement letter to the applicant, he was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing. Discharged in absentia, PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION 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 the applicant’s issue 1, there is no law or...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00174

    Original file (ND00-00174.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00174 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. 950221: Vacate suspended forfeiture awarded at CO's NJP dated 29Nov94 due to continued misconduct.