Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00128
Original file (ND00-00128.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-ABFAA, USN
Docket No. ND00-00128

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 991104, 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 designate a representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 000720. 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. My name is Z_ D_ B_ and I am writing to upgrade my "Other Than Honorable Discharge" to a "Honorable Discharge" status. I served in the U.S. Navy from 07aug 86 to 29 May 90. The reason for my "Other Than Honorable Discharge" was because of a pattern of misconduct according to the military bearings. An example of my misconduct was being continuously late for my duties. At my early age of 19 and 20 I did not fully understand the responsibility of my military duties. Therefore my chief, ABFC M_, considered me to be a irresponsible young man.

Since my discharge I have matured with age and have become a more responsible young man since I became a father. I am active in my community, I am gainfully employed with a growing company and I now see that responsibility is "key" to a positive way of life. Had I known that what I know now I would've been a much more responsible service man.

Being in the military has aided me in becoming a more dependable and responsible person. I have not regretted one moment of my military experience and I've encouraged other young men to join the Navy and experience it for themselves to enhance the disciplinary skills.

Attached you will find two references from individuals who have known me for along period of time and will attest to my personal and spiritual growth.

 Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
Character Reference ltr from H_ L. W_, B_ County Magistrate dated Oct 11, 1999
Character Reference ltr from H_ W. R_ dated Oct 10, 1999
Applicant's Letter to Board stating the same as in Part I, Issues, above

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: None
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     860328 - 860806  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 860807               Date of Discharge: 900529

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 03 09 23
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 17(Parental Consent) Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 25

 Highest Rate: ABFAN

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 2.00 (4)    Behavior: 1.95 (4)                OTA: 2.05

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: AFEM, SSDR (2)

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 :

871008:  Civilian conviction - Bremerton, Washington Municipal court for driving with a suspended license.
 Sentence: Fined $640.00 and 10 days in city jail ($400.00 and 10 days in city jail suspended for 2 years). Final disposition: $240 fine. Did not appeal conviction.

871028:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92: failure to obey a lawful general regulation, 87SEP23.
         Award: Forfeiture of $75 per month for 1 month, restriction and extra duty for 10 days. No indication of appeal in the record.

880222:  Retention Warning from CO, USS NIMITZ (CVN 68): Advised of deficiency (minor misconduct - i.e., tardiness, minor UA, disrespect to superiors and failure to obey lawful orders), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

880907:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86 (4 Specs): (1) UA from appointed place of duty, to wit: Div. morning muster from 0700 - 0900, 88JU22; (2) UA from appointed place of duty, to wit: Div. morning muster from 0700-0850, 88AUG04; (3) UA from appointed place of duty, to wit: Div morning muster from 0700 - 710, 88AUG05; (4) UA from appointed place of duty, to wit: extra military instruction muster from 07000-0815, 88AUG31.
         Award: Forfeiture of $150 per month for 0 month(s), restriction and extra duty for 15 days, reduction to E-2 (suspended 6 months). No indication of appeal in the record.
890105:  Unauthorized absence from USS NIMITZ cine 0015, located at Singapore. Surrendered onboard at 0715, 89JAN06 (1 day).

890117:  Vacate suspended reduction in rate awarded at CO's NJP on 88SEP07, due to member's continued misconduct.

890117:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: UA from USS NIMITZ from 0015 to 0700, 89JAN06; violation of UCMJ Article 107: make false official statement, with the intent to deceive, 89JAN06.
         Award: Forfeiture of $150 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 25 days, reduction to E-1 (suspended for 6 months). No indication of appeal in the record.

890927:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86 (3 Specs): fail to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty (1) 0430, 89AUG21, (2) 0430, 89AUG22, (3) 0430, 89AUG23.
         Award: Forfeiture of $150 per month for 1 month, restriction for 15 days. No indication of appeal in the record.
891218:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: UA from unit from0700-0711, 13NOV98; UA from until from 0700-0711, 15NOV89; UA from unit from 0700-0753, 17NOV89; UA from unit from0700-0731, 21NOV89; UA from unit from 0700-0725, 30NOV89; UA from unit from 0700 -0705, 1DEC89.
         Award: Forfeiture of $150 per month for 2 months (forfeiture $150 pay per month for 1 months suspended for 6 months), restriction for 6 days. No indication of appeal in the record.

900314:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: UA from 0630-0850, 3FEB90, UA from 0630-0900, 9FEB90 and UA from 0630-0730, 12FEB90.
         Award: Forfeiture of $150 per month for 1 month, restriction for 15 days. No indication of appeal in the record.

900322:  CO, USS NIMITZ (CVN 68) notified applicant of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and misconduct due to commission of serious offense as evidenced by your service record.
900323:  Applicant advised of his rights and having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to appear before an Administrative Discharge Board.
900412:  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 and misconduct due to commission of serious offense, that the misconduct warranted separation, and recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions and further recommended that the discharge not be suspended.

909512:  Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and misconduct due to a commission of a serious offense. Commanding officer’s comments (verbatim): "I concur with the Board's finding that ABFAA (Applicant) committed misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and misconduct due to commission of serious offenses as delineated in paragraph 1d above. I further concur with the Board's recommendation that ABFAA (Applicant) be separated and that the recommended discharge not be suspended. ABFAA (Applicant) received nonjudicial punishment on 28 October 1987. On 22 February 1988, ABFAA (Applicant) was issued and acknowledged a page 13 counseling warning stated that any further misconduct would result in processing for an administrative separation, with a characterization of discharge as Other Than Honorable. Despite these warnings, ABFAA (Applicant) received ninjudicial punishment five additional times, the last four during the past year. ABFAA (Applicant)'s repeated unauthorized absences are incompatible with maintaining high standards of performance, military discipline and readiness. Accordingly, I concur with the Board's recommendation that ABFAA (Applicant) be separated from the naval service with an Other than Honorable discharge."

900521:  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 900529 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’s first issue states that his relative youth and immaturity were the reasons for his misconduct. The NDRB found that while the applicant was young he in no way is less responsible for his actions. The record shows the applicant had six NJP’s over the course of his enlistment. Additionally the applicant was counseled regarding the consequences of his misconduct. Relief is not warranted.

The applicant’s second issue that he has matured since his discharge and become an active member of the community is commendable, but does not warrant relief by the NDRB. Relief denied.

The applicant’s third issue is: “being in the military has aided me in becoming a more dependable and responsible person. I have not regretted one moment of my military experience and I've encouraged other young men to join the Navy and experience it for themselves to enhance the disciplinary skills.” The NDRB found this issue non decisional. Relief is not warranted.

 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 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 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 Personnel Boards
                  Attn: Naval Discharge Review Board
                  720 Kennon Street SE Rm 309
                  Washington Navy Yard DC 20374-5023      


Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00194

    Original file (ND99-00194.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    No indication of appeal in the record.831019: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: UA from appointed place of duty, to wit: Restricted Men's Muster 7 times between 831003 through 831012. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 840521 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct pattern frequent involvement of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities (A). You may obtain a copy of DoD Directive...

  • 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 | 2005_Navy | ND0501206

    Original file (ND0501206.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable and the Narrative Reason for Separation be changed to “receive VA Benefits.” The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review. 920908: BUPERS directed the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to pattern of misconduct.920911: Applicant surrendered on board USS NIMITZ (CVN 68), at 0730 on 920911 (4...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-01105

    Original file (ND02-01105.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. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION The Manual for courts-martial authorizes the award of a punitive discharge if adjudged as part of the sentence upon conviction by a special or general court martial for violation of the UCMJ, Article 86- unauthorized absence.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00163

    Original file (ND01-00163.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00163 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 001121, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. Specification 2: Unauthorized absence 0730, 12Jul90 to 0730, 13Jul90 (1 day). Accordingly, I recommend administrative separation under other than honorable conditions.920106: BUPERS directed the applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-01110

    Original file (ND02-01110.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-01110 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020807, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :940414: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86 Unauthorized absence from 0530, 931224 until 0600, 940104 (10 days/surrendered) Award: Forfeiture of $466 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to EMFR. No indication of appeal in the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00945

    Original file (MD04-00945.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD04-00945 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20040517. ” Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered: None submitted PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: USMCR(J) 871123- 880719 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 880720 Date of Discharge: 920409 Length of Service...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00039

    Original file (ND03-00039.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 Letter of recommendation, dated August 22, 2002 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 891031 - 900423 COG Active: None Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 900424 Date of Discharge: 910904 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 01 04...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00065

    Original file (MD04-00065.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the Applicant’s service was discovered by the NDRB. Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events : 970820: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86:Specification: Absent from PT formation on 0530-0545, 970805.Awarded forfeiture of $300.00 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duties for 30 days, reduction to PFC. ...

  • USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-00114

    Original file (MD01-00114.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD01-00114 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 001030, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions. In the applicant’s issues 1 through 3, the Board found that although the applicant may have gotten a divorce, straightened out his financial problems and went back to school, this was not enough to upgrade his discharge to honorable. At this time, the applicant has not provided...