Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00009
Original file (ND01-00009.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-CECA, USN
Docket No. ND01-00009

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 001004, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. 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 010301. 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 – commission of a serious offense, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.



PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

1. Non-judicial punishments are common and not serious enough to warrant punishment for life. ASWAUTH [A92.02]

2. My conduct and ratings/behavior and proficiency marks were mostly pretty good ASWAUTH [A92.02]

3. My ability to serve was illustrated by the fact that the majority of my enlisted performance evaluation reports states I was progressing towards promotion. ASWAUTH [A92.12 4]

4. I had an alcohol and drug problem, my behavior was a result of it's use I was not given Drug and Alcohol Treatment only told to go to AA meetings that is not treatment. ASWAUTH [A93.18]

Thank you for considering my discharge upgrade


 Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
Copy of DD Form 214
Seven 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)     891031 - 900430  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 900501               Date of Discharge: 920813

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 02 03 13
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 21                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 24

 Highest Rate: CECN

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 2.20 (2)    Behavior: 3.10 (2)                OTA : 3.00

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: BER, NDSM, JMU

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/Misconduct – commission of a serious offense, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

910703:  Applicant unauthorized absence 0600-0750, 3Jul91.

910919:  Applicant unauthorized absence 0645-2100, 19Sep91.

 910927:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86 (2 specs): (1) Fail to go to appointed place of duty on 0645, 17Sep91, to wit: NMCB FOUR morning quarters, (2) Fail to go at the time prescribed to appointed place of duty on 0645, 17Sep91, to wit: NMCB FOUR morning quarters.
         Award: Forfeiture of $200 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 30 days. Forfeiture suspended for 6 months. No indication of appeal in the record.
911107:  Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (Disregard for punctuality and lack of regard for authority as evidenced by violation of UCMJ Articles 86 (unauthorized absence (2 specs).), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.
        
911125:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 113: Misbehavior of sentinel or lookout, was found sleeping upon his post.
         Award: Forfeiture of $100 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 15 days, reduction to CECA. Reduction suspended for 6 months. No indication of appeal in the record. [Extracted from CO's message dated 23Jul92.]
920717:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86 (3 specs): (1) Fail to go at the time prescribed to appointed place of duty on 0730, 26Apr92, to wit: NMCB FOUR duty section muster, (2) Fail to go at the time prescribed to appointed place of duty on 0730, 13Jun92, to wit: NMCB FOUR duty section muster, (3) Fail to go at the time prescribed to appointed place of duty on 1300, 19Jun92, to wit: NMCB FOUR mortar training, violation of UCMJ, Article 87: Miss movement of NMCB FOUR mortar platoon on 0330, 30Jun92.
         Award: Forfeiture of $440 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 15 days, reduction to CECA. Forfeiture, restriction and extra duty suspended for 6 months. No indication of appeal in the record.
920722:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.
920722:          Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights.
920723:  Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.

920811:  BUPERS 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 920813 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (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: “Non-judicial punishments are common and not serious enough to warrant punishment for life.” The NDRB found the applicant’s documented misconduct warranted separation with a characterization of service as Other Than Honorable. The Board does not find the intent of the discharge is “punishment for life”, but rather describes the applicant’s service. Relief is not warranted.

The applicant’s second issue states: “My conduct and ratings/behavior and proficiency marks were mostly pretty good.” The Board found the applicant’s positive contributions were outweighed by his misconduct. Relief is denied.

The applicant’s third issue states: “My ability to serve was illustrated by the fact that the majority of my enlisted performance evaluation reports states I was progressing towards promotion.” The Board agrees the applicant had potential to serve. The Board found that the applicant failed to conform to the standards of conduct required by members of the armed forces. Relief is denied.

The applicant’s fourth issue states: “I had an alcohol and drug problem, my behavior was a result of it's use I was not given Drug and Alcohol Treatment only told to go to AA meetings that is not treatment.” The NDRB found nothing in the record to support this issue. Relief is denied.

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), effective 15 Aug 91 until
04 Mar 93, Article 3630600, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT – COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE.

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 | ND99-00961

    Original file (ND99-00961.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND99-00961 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 990709, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 One page of enlistment/reenlistment document Statement from applicant dated June 23, 1999 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-01299

    Original file (ND02-01299.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. No indication of appeal in the record.970715: DD Form 214: Applicant discharged under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600. At this time, the Applicant has not provided any verifiable documentation of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-01422

    Original file (ND04-01422.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB also advised that the Board first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing. 950923: Applicant returned to military control on 0600, 950923 by Navy Deserter Information Point, Washington, DC.951018: BUPERS directed the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense. Relief denied.The Applicant contends that because he was discharged prior to receiving treatment for drug or...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-01123

    Original file (ND02-01123.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-01123 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020805, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. No indication of appeal in the record.910523: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence from 1800 restricted men's muster and extra duty on 910517. At this time, the Applicant has not provided such documentation for the Board to consider.

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00616

    Original file (ND99-00616.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 (C and D).Regarding the applicant’s first five issues, it is the Board’s responsibility to review the applicant’s entire service record. In the applicant’s sixth issue, he asks the Board to consider his post-service conduct in assessing the merits of his application. At this time the applicant has not provided sufficient...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500506

    Original file (ND0500506.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Recommend immediate administrative separation with the characterization of separation as other than honorable as a result of his NJP with NMCB 133 for violation of UCMJ article 134 (2 specs) indecent exposure and communicating a threat.920820: Commanding Officer, Naval Station Mayport, recommended expeditious administrative separation. The names, and votes of the members of the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501024

    Original file (ND0501024.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests that his characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The Applicant’s service was marred by nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for violations of the UCMJ Article 92 (failure to obey) and Article 134 (drunk and disorderly), a retention warning for dereliction of duty and five place of duty unauthorized absences. The names, and votes of the members of the Board are recorded on the original of this document and may be obtained from...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00083

    Original file (ND02-00083.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    No indication of appeal in the record.960307: Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense as evidenced by CO's NJP on 960215.960422: Applicant advised of rights and having elected to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected the right to obtain copies of all documents used to support the basis for the separation and apparently elected to waive all other rights. When a...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00510

    Original file (ND00-00510.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    No indication of appeal in the record.910901: [USS MOUNT WHITNEY (LCC-20)] notified applicant of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct an misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense [EXTRACTED FROM CO'S MESSAGE]. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 911220 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to a...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00176

    Original file (ND00-00176.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I am asking that my discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. Thank you 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) 910312 - 910507 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 910508 Date of Discharge: 940112 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active:...