Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00438
Original file (ND00-00438.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-STGSR, USN
Docket No. ND00-00438

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 000215, 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. The NDRB asked the applicant for additional documentation to support his post service conduct, but he failed to respond.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 001121. 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/PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

1. During my tour in the Navy I was having marriage problems which ended in divorce. I was on medical hold waiting on a medical board. I was also under a heavy financial burden. I was top of my class in all schools. That I attended and was never in trouble prior to my marriage problems. Request my discharge be up graded from UCH to Honorable.

 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: None
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     910621 - 910624  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 910625               Date of Discharge: 931203

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 02 05 09
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 18                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 92

 Highest Rate: STGSA

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 2.47 (3)    Behavior: 2.47 (3)                OTA: 2.93

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM

Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

 Character, Narrative Reason, and Authority of Discharge (at time of issuance):
UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

930827:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86 (9 specs): (1) Unauthorized absence on 0900-0930, 6Jul93, (2) Unauthorized absence 0930-1000, 8Jul93, (3) Unauthorized absence 0730-0738 14Jul93, (4) Unauthorized absence 0700-0710, 22Jul93, (5) Unauthorized absence 0700-0830, 27Jul93, (6) Unauthorized absence 0630-0812, 28Jul93, (7) Unauthorized absence 0900-1615, 2Aug93, (8) Unauthorized absence 0800-0925, 11Aug93, (9) Unauthorized absence 0730-0900, 17Aug93.
         Award: Reduction to STGSR. No indication of appeal in the record.
930930:  Retention Warning from Fleet ASW Training Center, Atlantic: Advised of deficiency (Absence from place of duty.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

931022:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence 0900-1210, 15Oct93.
         Award: Forfeiture of $400 per month for 1 month, written reprimand. Forfeiture suspended for 6 months. No indication of appeal in the record.

931027:  Fleet ASW Training Center, Atlantic 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 NJP of 27Aug93 for 9 specifications of unauthorized absence, NJP of 22Oct93 for unauthorized absence.

931027:          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.
931101:  Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. Commanding officer’s comments (verbatim): STGSR (applicant) has been a constant administrative burden on this command. Countless man hours have been spent counseling him in a futile effort to make him a productive sailor. His frequent minor violations of the UCMJ and poor attitude are convincing evidence of his inability to adapt to military environment and his lack of potential for future useful naval service. Strongly recommend separation with a characterization of General, Under Other Than Honorable Conditions.

931112:  BUPERS 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 931203 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 issue states: “During my tour in the Navy I was having marriage problems which ended in divorce. I was on medical hold waiting on a medical board. I was also under a heavy financial burden. I was top of my class in all schools. That I attended and was never in trouble prior to my marriage problems. Request my discharge be up graded from UCH to Honorable.” The applicant provided no post service documentation to support his issue. Furthermore, the NDRB requested post service documentation from the applicant on 000915, and the applicant failed to respond. 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 15560C, Change 5, effective 05 Mar 93 until 21 Jul 94), 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 | 2001_Navy | ND01-00305

    Original file (ND01-00305.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    No indication of appeal in the record.990917: Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (Unauthorized absence, failing to go to appointed place of duty and breaking restriction which was subsequently violated when he was awarded punishment at CO's NJP on 28Oct99 for failing to go to appointed place of duty. There is nothing in the applicant’s service record or application that shows the applicant was not responsible for his documented misconduct while on active duty. The names, and votes of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00904

    Original file (ND04-00904.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND04-00904 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20040512. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. ________________________________________________________________________ In accordance with 32 C.F.R., section 724.166, and SECNAVINST 5420.174C, enclosure (1), paragraph 1.16, The American Legion submits to the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB or Board) the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00578

    Original file (ND00-00578.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board conducted a thorough review of all official records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, in addition to the applicant’s extensive post-service, community, volunteer work. No indication of appeal in the record.850228: Commanding Officer, Flag Allowance, Commander THIRD Fleet notified applicant of intended recommendation for discharge under Other Than Honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to Drug abuse and Pattern of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00899

    Original file (ND02-00899.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00899 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020612, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. CA action 921027: Sentence approved and ordered executed.921119: Retention Warning from [USS JOHN F KENNEDY (CV-67)]: Advised of deficiency (Misconduct as evidenced by a Summary Court-Martial on 921014, for violation of the UCMJ, Article 86 (4 Specifications): Specification 1: Unauthorized absence from 920427 until...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00256

    Original file (ND02-00256.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00256 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020114, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions. STGC L_ publicly stated his personal dislike of me and because of this denied me training that was in my Pipeline contract and offered my billet to other, lesser qualified students. Relief denied.Issue 3: The applicant alleges he was denied training due to the personal dislike of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00183

    Original file (ND03-00183.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    My life was robbed because T_ F_ and J_ W_ didn’t’ like Hispanics.” 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): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 860130 - 860223 COG Active: None Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 860224 Date of Discharge: 890301 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 03 00...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-01004

    Original file (ND00-01004.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-01004 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000830, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. 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 two issues requested an upgrade based on his post service...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00085

    Original file (ND04-00085.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND04-00085 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20031017. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00562

    Original file (ND03-00562.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. 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, also advised that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) does not travel, all hearing are held in the Washington National Capital Region. Verifiable proof of any post-service accomplishments...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00279

    Original file (ND00-00279.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00279 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 991227, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Riverside Community College transcript Riverside Community College Soccer team photo Certificate form Athletic Participation dated 1999-2000 Certificate of A School completion DUI...