Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-01057
Original file (ND00-01057.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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


ex-SA, USN
Docket No. ND00-01057

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 000918, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. The applicant listed the American Legion as the representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 010301. After a thorough review of the records, 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)/PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-140 (formerly 3630600).




PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION


Issues (verbatim)

 1. (Equity Issue) This former member 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 his application.

 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)     970930 - 980615  COG
Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 980616               Date of Discharge: 990905

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 01 02 20
         Inactive: None
Age at Entry: 19                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 32
Highest Rate: SA

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):
Performance: NMF                           Behavior: NMF             OTA: NMF

 Military Decorations: None
Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: AFEM, BER

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: None
Character, Narrative Reason, and Authority of Discharge (at time of issuance):

GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-140 (formerly 3630600).
Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

990217:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 91: Disrespectful in language towards a chief petty officer on 28Jan99, to wit: by saying ”fuck you", violation of UCMJ, Article 117: Wrongfully use provoking words to a chief petty officer on 28Jan99, to wit: by saying "get the fuck out of my way, don't put your fucking hands on me", violation of UCMJ, Article 128 (2 specs): (1) Assaulted a superior petty officer, to wit: by swinging his arms at them, (2) Assaulted a superior petty officer, to wit: unlawfully push SMSR in the chest with his hands and punch SMSR in the face with his fist, violation of UCMJ, Article 134 (2 specs): (1) Wrongfully communicate a threat to SMSR, to wit: "I am going to kill you"., (2) Wrongfully communicate a threat to SMC, to wit: "Fuck you, I will kill you too".
         Award: Forfeiture of $480 per month for 2 months, restriction for 60 days. No indication of appeal in the record.
990420:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92 (6 specs): (1) Failure to obey a lawful order on 0630, 30Mar99, to wit: wrongfully failing to muster with the restricted personnel, (2) Failure to obey a lawful order on 1800, 1Apr99, to wit: wrongfully failing to muster with the restricted personnel, (3) Failure to obey a lawful order on 2210, 5Apr99. to wit: wrongfully having personal gear in the restricted man's berthing while in a restricted man's status, (4) Failure to obey a lawful order on 0630, 7Apr99, to wit: wrongfully failing to muster with the restricted personnel, (5) Failure to obey a lawful order on 0630, 10Apr99, to wit: wrongfully failing to muster with the restricted personnel, (6) Failure to obey a lawful order on 0640, 14Apr99, to wit: wrongfully failing to muster with the restricted personnel..
         Award: Forfeiture of $480 per month for 1 month, restriction for 30 days. No indication of appeal in the record.
990420:  Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (Failure to obey a lawful order.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.
        
990422:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Failure to obey a lawful order, to wit: to be in his assigned rack while in a restricted man's status at 2200 hours.
         Award: Forfeiture of $150 per month for 1 month, confinement on bread and water for 3 days. No indication of appeal in the record.
990820:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 91 (3 specs): (1) Threat with contempt on 29Jul99, to wit: wrongfully throwing his sound-powered phones on the deck and contemptuously turning from Boatswain's Mate Second Class while he was talking to him, (2) Disobey a lawful order on 2200, 29Jul99, to wit: wrongfully failing to report to the bridge, (3) Willfully disobey lawful order on 2200, 29Jul99, to wit: wrongfully walking away from Boatswain's Mate Second Class, violation of UCMJ, Article 113: Wrongfully leaving post on 29Jul99 before he was regularly relieved, violation of UCMJ, Article 134: Wrongfully communicating a threat on 2299, 29Jul99 to Boatswain's Mate Second Class, to wit: saying to him "You write me up and you'll see what happens and I'll go UA faster than you ever seen".
         Award: Restriction and extra duty for 30 days. No indication of appeal in the record.
990902:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92 (3 specs): (1) Failure to obey a lawful order, to wit: by failing to muster with restricted personnel on 0630, 28Aug99, (2) Failure to obey a lawful order, to wit: by wrongfully sleeping in an AIMD berthing on 30Aug99, (3) Failure to obey a lawful order, to wit: by wrongfully sleeping during the workday on 30Aug99, violation of UCMJ, Article 134: Communicating a threat, to wit: by saying to an AN he had better watch his back on 30Aug99.
          Award: Forfeiture of $300 per month for 1 month, confinement on bread and water for 3 days. No indication of appeal in the record.
990902:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge general (under honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.
990902:          Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights.
990904:  Commanding officer directed discharge general (under 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 990905 general (under 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, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper and equitable (C and D).
The applicant’s representative submitted the following issue: (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 his application. The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. However, 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, is considered. The applicant provided no documentation of his post-service. The applicant's efforts need to be more encompassing than those provided. The applicant should have produced evidence of continuing educational pursuits, a verifiable employment record, documentation of community service and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities in order for consideration for clemency based on post-service conduct. Therefore no relief will be granted. He is encouraged to continue with his pursuits and is reminded that he is eligible for a personal appearance hearing provided the application is received within 15 years from the date of discharge. Relief denied.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

 A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 18, effective
12 Dec 1997 until Present, Article 1910-140 (formerly 3630600), SEPARATION BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT - 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 | ND01-01050

    Original file (ND01-01050.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-01050 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010807, 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:Copy of DD Form 214 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: USN None Inactive: USNR (DEP) 990630 - 990706 COG Period of Service...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00977

    Original file (ND00-00977.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00977 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000804, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. In the acknowledgement letter to the applicant, the applicant was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing. 991027: COMCARGRU THREE directed the applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00758

    Original file (ND03-00758.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-00758 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030326. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. ” Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant’s DD Form 214 (Member 1 and 4) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of...

  • 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 | ND01-00280

    Original file (ND01-00280.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-ABFC, USN Docket No. ND01-00280 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010109, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00873

    Original file (ND03-00873.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-00873 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030424. 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 civilian life subsequent to leaving naval service. The NDRB is authorized, however, to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge to the extent such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-01106

    Original file (ND01-01106.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Award: Forfeiture three days pay for 1 month, restriction for 14 days, No indication of appeal in the record.951026: Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (OIC's Mast, 26 October 1996 for violation of the UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence, to wit: without authority absent yourself from your organization at or about 0700, 26 October 1995 until 0810, 26 October 1995. 981110: Commanding officer directed discharge general (under honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct due to a...

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-00892

    Original file (MD03-00892.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. 010612: Vacate suspended forfeiture awarded at CO’s NJP dated 010507.010614: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92: 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).A characterization of service of under other than honorable...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00722

    Original file (ND00-00722.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 881004 - 920219 HON Inactive: USNR (DEP) 880713 - 881003 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 920220 Date of Discharge: 961010 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 04 07 12 Inactive: None 960703: Vacate...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-01108

    Original file (ND01-01108.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Naval Discharge Review Board (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 in absentia on 000224 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to drug abuse (use) (A). The applicant can provide additional documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments at that time.