Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-01072
Original file (ND99-01072.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-MRFN, USN
Docket No. ND99-01072

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 990808, 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 000427. 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: GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630605.

The NDRB did note an administrative error on the original DD Form 214. Block 18, Remarks should read: “CONTINUOUS HONORABLE ACTIVE SERVICE FROM 910515 UNTIL 950511. Block 25, Separation Authority should read: “NAVMILPERSMAN 3630605” vice “MILPERSMAN 3630600”. The original DD Form 214 should be corrected or reissued as appropriate.

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
Statements from applicant

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: USN                        910515 - 950511  HON
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     940425 - 910514  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 950512               Date of Discharge: 970516

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 02 00 03
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 25                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 37

 Highest Rate: MR3

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.80 (2)    Behavior: 3.70 (2)                OTA: 3.80

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: GCM, NDSM, JMU, OSR (3)

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

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

GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630605.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

960618:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Failure to obey order, violation of UCMJ Article 128 (2 specs): Assault.
         Award: Restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to MRFN. Reduction suspended for 6 months. No indication of appeal in the record.
960618:  Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (Disobeying a lawful order and assault (2 specs.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

960712:  Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (An alcohol related incident as identified by: Simple assault.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

970402:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 134: Obtaining services under false pretenses between 15Dec96 to 28Oct96.
         Award: Forfeiture of $100 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to MRFA. Reduction suspended for 6 months. No indication of appeal in the record.
970403:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge general (under honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.
970403:          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.
970411:  Commanding officer directed discharge general (under honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense. Commanding officer’s comments (verbatim): MRFN (applicant) is a fine machinist; however, he has been given many chances to correct his off-duty behavior, without result. I personally warned him that he would be subject to separation if he committed further acts of misconduct. I have no choice but to direct his separation with a General discharge, under honorable conditions.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 970516 general (under 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 introduced no decisional issues for consideration by the Board.

 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.

X. In Appendix 12 of the Manual for Courts-Martial, a punitive discharge is authorized for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Article 86, for unauthorized absence for a period in excess of 30 days and if adjudged at a Special or General Court Martial

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 | ND03-00083

    Original file (ND03-00083.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. 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, D, and E).Issue 1. At this time, the applicant has not provided any documentation for the Board to consider.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00838

    Original file (ND04-00838.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND04-00838 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20040429. The Applicant requested the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. ]970505: Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.970509: Commander, Naval Surface Group, Middle Pacific authorized the Applicant's...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00759

    Original file (ND02-00759.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Age at Entry: 19 Years Contracted: 4 (24 months extension) Education Level: 12 AFQT: 76 Highest Rate: IC3 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks): Performance: 3.93 (3) Behavior: 3.80 (3) OTA: 4.00 Performance: 5.00 (2) Behavior: 3.80 (2) OTA: 4.00 Military Decorations: None Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM, AFSM, AFEM, SSDR, NATO, NMCAM, GCM Days of Unauthorized Absence: 117 Character, Narrative Reason, and Authority of Discharge (at time of issuance):UNDER OTHER...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01156

    Original file (ND03-01156.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-01156 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030625. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The Applicant’s statements and documents provided contend he was required to attend to his wife’s condition and could therefore not deploy.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-01103

    Original file (ND01-01103.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-01103 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010821, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. Normally, to permit relief, an error or injustice must have existed during the period of enlistment in question. 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 | ND00-00460

    Original file (ND00-00460.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    971121: Applicant's statement.971203: Commanding officer directed discharge general (under honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct due to the 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 (C and D).The applicant’s issue states: “My discharge was inequitable because there are no charges or counseling sheets providing that I committed...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00783

    Original file (ND99-00783.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Six pages from applicant's service record Copy of DD Form 214 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: USNR (DEP) 910507 - 910515 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 910516 Date of Discharge: 950427 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 03 11 12 Inactive:...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00877

    Original file (ND02-00877.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. My command told me there was no way that I could be reassigned. 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).Issue 1: The Board’s charter limits its review to a determination on the propriety and equity of the discharge.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00242

    Original file (ND00-00242.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The discharge shall remain: UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630605.The NDRB did note an administrative error on the original DD Form 214. No indication of appeal in the record.970411: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for administrative discharge from the naval service by reason of fraudulent entry into the naval service as evidenced by failing to reveal your prior marijuana use and recommendation for discharge under other...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00174

    Original file (ND99-00174.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND99-00174 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 981117, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The board voted unanimously to change the reason for discharge to reflect personality disorder.In the applicant’s issue, the Board found no basis for relief. The discharge was equitable and correctly characterizes the applicant’s service and separation based upon a personality disorder.