Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00301
Original file (ND00-00301.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-AZAA, USN
Docket No. ND00-00301

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 000106, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. The applicant designated the American Legion as the representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 001005. 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 4-1 that the character of the discharge shall not change. The discharge shall remain: GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/UNSATISFACTORY PERFORMANCE , authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-156 (formerly 3630300).

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

 1. (Equity Issue) Her UCMJ violation and performance problems notwithstanding, this former member proffers that her overall service record reflects that she served both honorably and faithfully. On this basis, she opines that upgrade of her character of service to fully honorable is warranted.

2. (Equity Issue) This former member further requests that the Board include provisions of SECNAVINST 5420.174C., enclosure (1), Chapter 9, as it pertains to post-service conduct, in assessing the merits of her application.

 Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
Copy of DD Form 214 (2 copies)
State of Louisiana Validation of Nurse Assistance Training dtd26 Apr 2000
Diploma Certificate (Louisiana Technical College) in Practical Nursing dtd 17 Aug 2000
Applicant's Navy's Performance Report (4 Reports)

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: None
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     941110 - 950102  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 950103               Date of Discharge: 980521

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 03 04 19
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 18                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 75

 Highest Rate: AZ3

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.30 (6)    Behavior: 2.40 (7)                OTA: 3.08

Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM, GCM

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: 2

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

GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/UNSATISFACTORY PERFORMANCE, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-156 (formerly 3630300).

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

971202:  Unauthorized absence since 1215, NAVAVSCOLSCOM Pensacola, FL. Intentions unknown.

971204:  Returned at 1615. Absence not excused (2 days).
971211:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86 (2 Specs): Spec 1 - unauthorized absence 02DEC97 to 1155 02DEC97; Spec 2 - unauthorized absence 1215 02DEC97 to 1615 04DEC97.
         Award: Forfeiture of $400 per month for 1 month, extra duty for 45 days, reduction to E-2. No indication of appeal in the record.
971211:  Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (violation of UCMJ as evidenced by Captain's Mast on 11DEC97), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.         

980508:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under honorable conditions (general) by reason of unsatisfactory performance as evidenced of two enlisted performance evaluations with unsatisfactory marks of 1.0 and violations of your Page 13 counseling warning.
980508:  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.
980522:  Commanding officer advised CHNAVPERS that applicant was discharged under honorable conditions (general) by reason of unsatisfactory performance as evidenced by two enlisted performance evaluations with unsatisfactory marks of 1.0 and violation of a Page 13 counseling warning. Commanding officer’s comments (verbatim): "AZAA (Applicant)'s performance has declined over the course of her tour. She has exhausted command resources and has not shown improvement or corrected her deficiencies. AZAA (Applicant) has been counseled formally and informally on numerous occasions. She continues to exhibit signs of immaturity and lack of commitment. AZAA has proven herself to be a liability to this command and to the Navy. Per reference (a) (MILPERSMAN Chapter 36), authorize separation with a General (under Honorable Conditions) characterization of service.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 980521 under honorable conditions (general) by reason of unsatisfactory performance (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: “(Equity Issue ) Her UCMJ violation and performance problems notwithstanding, this former member proffers that her overall service record reflects that she served both honorably and faithfully. On this basis, she opines that upgrade of her character of service to fully honorable is warranted.” The NDRB found that in review of the applicant’s service record, the applicant’s misconduct and substandard evaluations could not be overlooked. Additionally, her final trait average in behavior was 2.4, below the required 2.8 trait average. The NDRB found that a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge was warranted. Relief is not warranted.

 The applicant’s second issue states: “(Equity Issue ) This former member further requests that the Board include provisions of SECNAVINST 5420.174C., enclosure (1), Chapter 9, as it pertains to post-service conduct, in assessing the merits of her application. ” The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the re characterization of a discharge. The applicant must be aware that there is no law or regulation which provides that an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time, or good conduct in the civilian life subsequent to leaving the service. Normally, to permit relief, an error or injustice must have been found to have existed during the period of enlistment in question. Outstanding post-service conduct, to the extent that such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review, may be considered by the NDRB. The NDRB did not find the applicant’s post service significant to warrant a change in the discharge issued. Relief is not warranted.

The applicant is reminded that she 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. The Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), change 18, effective 12 Dec 97 to Present, Article 1910-156 (formerly 3630300), Separation by Reason of Unsatisfactory Performance.

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 | 2000_Navy | ND00-01052

    Original file (ND00-01052.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB also advised that the board first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 981022 honorable by reason of unsatisfactory performance (A). 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.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00774

    Original file (ND00-00774.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 applicant’s issue 1, the Board found that alcohol/drug dependency is not an issue. In response to applicant’s issue 2, the Board has no authority to change re-enlistment codes or make recommendations to permit re-entry into the Naval Service or any other of the Armed Forces. There was nothing in the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00492

    Original file (ND02-00492.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00492 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020308, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. I am requesting my discharge changed to honorable, because I did serve honorably during my time. Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :990602: NAVPERS 1070/613: Applicant discharged under honorable conditions (general) by reason of unsatisfactory performance and failure to respond within 30 days of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-01212

    Original file (ND99-01212.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In lieu of the facts, ADAN_____(applicant) is being separated from the Naval Service with a General (Under Honorable) discharge. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 981211 with a general (under honorable conditions) for unsatisfactory performance (A). After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was improper (C and D).The...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-01212 (4)

    Original file (ND99-01212 (4).rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In lieu of the facts, ADAN_____(applicant) is being separated from the Naval Service with a General (Under Honorable) discharge. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 981211 with a general (under honorable conditions) for unsatisfactory performance (A). After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was improper (C and D).The...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00738

    Original file (ND00-00738.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The reason shall change to: Secretarial Authority.The applicant’s first issue states: “Over 95% of my service record is honorable and so warrants an upgrade to honorable. I received an Honorable discharge and a good conduct medal from my previous command after 4 years of service.” As every enlistment results in a discharge for that period alone, the NDRB found the applicant’s low overall performance, 1.56, and misconduct, violation of UCMJ Articles 86 and 107, in his last enlistment...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-01249

    Original file (ND02-01249.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-01249 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 20020904, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. Decision A record discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20031017. Pt did indicate an understanding of same.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-01063

    Original file (ND01-01063.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Pt fit for duty psychiatrically, pt should continue evaluation by neurology for her headaches. Relief based on this issue of propriety is not warranted.The applicant’s second issue states: “This discharge is improper because it clearly states in section i, Personality Disorder in SECNAVINST 1910.4B Part 1 reasons for separation, that a separation is not appropriate when separation is warranted on the basis of unsatisfactory performance or misconduct. The summary of service clearly...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00602

    Original file (ND01-00602.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 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: USN 920715 - 960616 HON Inactive: USNR (DEP) 920610 - 920714 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 960617 Date of Discharge: 980515 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 01 10 26 Inactive: None After a thorough...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00833

    Original file (ND02-00833.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 (2 copies) Unofficial transcript PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 951128 - 951213 COG Active: None Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 951214 Date of Discharge: 971008 Length of Service (years, months, days): Inactive: None Age at Entry: 18...