Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00280
Original file (ND00-00280.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-FR, USN
Docket No. ND00-00280

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 991227, 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 000810. 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, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630605.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues (verbatim)

1. I would like my discharge corrected. This was sent to me from my school.

 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)     960627 - 961208  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 961209               Date of Discharge: 980304

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 01 02 26
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 19                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 38

 Highest Rate: FN

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: NMF                  Behavior: NMF             OTA: NMF

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: None

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630605.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

970609:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Failure to go to appointed place of duty on 0700-0800, 30May97, violation of UCMJ Article 134 (2 specs): (1) Wrongfully communicate to FR a threat by saying "Don't you ever come in my room again on 30May97, (2) Disorderly conduct on 30May97.
         Award: Forfeiture of $500 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 30 days, reduction to FA. No indication of appeal in the record.
970610:  Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (CO's NJP held on 9 June 1997 for VUCMJ Article 86 - Failure to go to appointed place of duty; Article 134 - Disorderly conduct and threat, communicating.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

970912:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 117 (2 specs): Provoking speeches and gestures on 3Sep97, violation of UCMJ Article 128 (2 specs): (1) Assault FR by slamming a broom against the rack causing it to slide down against the middle rack hitting the FR on 3Sep97, (2) Unlawfully strike FR across the face with a metal clothes hanger breaking FR's eye glasses and bruising her right eye on 3Sep97.
         Award: Restriction and extra duty for 15 days, reduction to FA. Reduction suspended for 6 months. No indication of appeal in the record.
971115:  Applicant advised she failed to meet the physical readiness standards due to failing the official PRT/body fat or failing to participate in the official PRT for the 1 st time.
980129:  Vacate suspended reduction to FR awarded at CO's NJP dated 12Sep97 due to continued misconduct.
980129:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence 1200, 20Jan98.
         Award: Forfeiture of $400 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days. No indication of appeal in the record.
980204:  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 misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct as evidenced by service record entries in your current enlistment.
980217:          Applicant advised of her rights and having consulted 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.
980218:  Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense and pattern of misconduct.

980225:  Commander, Amphibious Group Two 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 980304 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (A and B). The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (C). 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).

The applicant’s issue 1 is a non-decisional issue. The applicant had 3 NJPs and had committed misconduct due to a serious offense. She was therefore processed for misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct as well as commission of a serious offense. The applicant was eventually discharged for commission of a serious offense with an other than honorable discharge. The record is devoid of evidence that the applicant was not responsible for her conduct or that he should not be held accountable for her actions.
The Board finds this discharge proper an equitable.

 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.
B. In Appendix 12 of the Manual for Courts-Martial, a punitive discharge is authorized for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Article 128, assault and if adjudged at a Special or General Court Martial

C. 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.

D. 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.

E. 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 | ND99-00409

    Original file (ND99-00409.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    980326: 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.980327: Commanding officer directed discharge general (under honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense and entry level performance and conduct. The Board did not feel that the applicant deserved an...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-01132

    Original file (ND99-01132.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. Character, Narrative Reason, and Authority of Discharge (at time of issuance):GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-142 (formerly 3630605). PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 980901 general (under honorable conditions)...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00947

    Original file (ND02-00947.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00947 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020619, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). 010207: Applicant from unauthorized absence at 0730 on 010207 (113 days/ surrendered).010308: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense, misconduct due to civil...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00634

    Original file (ND01-00634.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I was punished while still in service for my unauthorized absence & feel my discharge should have been based on my psychological evaluations. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 Eight pages from applicant's service record PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: USNR (DEP) 960412 - 960908 COG Period of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00245

    Original file (ND00-00245.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 981120 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (A). 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. PART IV - INFORMATION FOR...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-01157

    Original file (ND99-01157.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND99-01157 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 990826, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. 980908: COMNAVMEDCEN Portsmouth directed the applicant's discharge with a characterization of service as Honorable by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense and physical readiness test failure.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-01056

    Original file (ND04-01056.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND04-01056 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20040618. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. 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:

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00028

    Original file (ND01-00028.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    It is, therefore, recommended that Seaman Apprentice (applicant) be separated administratively from the Naval Service under 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 D).The applicant’s issues state: “I have been a good citizen since discharge.” and “I have been working and saving money to go to college.” The applicant...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00493

    Original file (ND00-00493.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00493 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 991214, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable, general/under honorable conditions or entry level separation or uncharacterized and the reason for the discharge be changed to economic reasons. With his violation of the page 13 warning, GSMFN (applicant) left this command with no other alternate to processing him for administrative separation, and I know of no...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00710

    Original file (ND01-00710.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Decision A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 011127. 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 improper because I honestly am not a thief and I believe that if I was given another chance I would have better represented myself. The applicant did not provide any documentation to...