Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00105
Original file (ND01-00105.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-MSSR, USNR
Docket No. ND01-00105

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 001030, 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 010406. 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 - Pattern of Misconduct, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

 1. My discharge was inequitable because it was based on an isolated incident that did not warrant such a discharge after 4 years of service.

Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
Letter from Applicant (3pgs)
Response Letter from Applicant (2pgs)
Copy of DD Form 214
Congressional correspondence, dated 22 March 2001

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: NONE
         Inactive: NONE

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 890412               Date of Discharge: 920427

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 02 00 01
         Inactive: 01 00 14

 Age at Entry: 17                          Years Contracted: 8

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 43

 Highest Rate: MSSN

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: NOB                  Behavior: NOB             OTA: NOB

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM, SASM(w2b*), NUC, KLM, SSDR

Days of Unauthorized Absence: 3

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/Misconduct – Pattern of misconduct, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

890814:  Order to active duty training.
890928:  Retention Warning from [RTC, NTC San Diego, CA]: Advised of deficiency (Violation of the UCMJ, Article 92, failed to obey other lawful written order.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

890928:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Having knowledge of a lawful order issued by the CNO, to wit: Para 510.7.A., OPNAVINST 3120.32B of 860926, on or about 0810, 890925, fail to obey the same by wrongfully sleeping on the deck.
Award: Forfeiture of $200.00 per month for 1 month. No indication of appeal in the record.
900120:  Released from active duty training after serving 5 months and 7 days.

901001:  Involuntary recalled back to active duty for 19 months.

910723:  Retention Warning from [USS RANGER (CV-61)]: Advised of deficiency (Violation of the UCMJ, Article 86 UA from unit 0700-0730, 910628 and go from appointed place of duty 910731. Article 90 Disobeying a lawful command 910720, and Article 92 disobey a lawful order 910628), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.
910723:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: UA from 0700 to 0730, 910628, and go from appointed place of duty, to wit: AFT Bakeshop, 910713, violation of UCMJ Article 90: Willfully disobey lawful order of a commissioned officer, to wit: to proceed to the laboratory for a blood draw and specimen container, and to proceed to the pharmacy to fill a prescription, 910620, violation of UCMJ Article 92: Wrongfully disobey written order by coming onboard NAS North Island in a food serviceman working uniform, 910628.
         Award: Forfeiture of $300.00 pay per month for 1 month (forfeiture of $100.00 pay per month suspended for 6 months), restriction for 20 days (10 days suspended for 6 months), extra duty for 10 days. No indication of appeal in the record.
910821:  The suspension of forfeiture of $100.00 pay per month and restriction for 10 days awarded at CO's NJP on 910723 vacated due to continued misconduct.

910821:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Go from appointed place of duty on 910812.
Award: Forfeiture of $300.00 pay per month for 1 month (forfeiture of $100.00 pay per month suspended for 6 months), restriction for 30 days (15 days suspended for 6 months). No indication of appeal in the record.
920324:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86 (4 Specs): UA from unit 0700-0800, 920307; 0700-0800, 920310; 0700-0900, 920311; and 920320-920323 (3days/S); violation of UCMJ Article 91 (2 Specs): Disobey lawful order 920317, and Disrespectful in language in language and Deportment to P01, 920317; violation of UCMJ Article 134: Indecent assault 920215.
         Award: Forfeiture of $250.00 per month for 2 months (suspended for 3 months), restriction and extra duty for 45 days (15 days restriction and extra duty suspended for 3 months), reduction to E-2. No indication of appeal in the record.
920325:  USS RANGER (CV-61) 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 three or more UCMJ punishments committed during current enlistment, and misconduct due to commission of serious offenses as evidenced by the Articles 90, 91 (2 Specifications), 92, 107, and 134 (Indecent assault), UCMJ, offense committed during current enlistment.
920325:          Applicant advised of his rights and having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to appear before an Administrative Discharge Board.
920328:  An Administrative Discharge Board, based upon a preponderance of the evidence and by unanimous vote, found that the applicant had committed misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and misconduct due to commission of a serious offense, that the misconduct warranted separation, and recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions.

920414:  Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct as evidenced by three or more UCMJ punishments committed during current enlistment, and misconduct due to commission of serious offenses as evidenced by the Articles 90, 91 (2 Specifications), 92, 107, and 134 (Indecent assault), UCMJ, offense committed during current enlistment.

920421:  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 920427 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: “My discharge was inequitable because it was based on an isolated incident that did not warrant such a discharge after 4 years of service.” The Board found no inequity in the applicant’s discharge. The record clearly shows the applicant had four NJP’s in his enlistment. The applicant showed a pattern of unwillingness to abide by the standards required of servicemen and women. The other than honorable discharge accurately characterizes the applicant’s service. 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 – 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

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-01298

    Original file (MD03-01298.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. Violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Derelict in performance of duties by not delivering orders to TMO. Appeal voluntarily withdrawn on 920122.920110: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct as evidenced by three NJPs.920110: Applicant advised of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00487

    Original file (ND99-00487.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    No indication of appeal in the record.920708: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.920709: Applicant advised of his rights and having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to appear before an Administrative Discharge Board.920723: Applicant waived his right to an Administrative Discharge Board and representation at the board and to make a...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00504

    Original file (ND99-00504.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    920323: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of alcohol abuse subsequent to inpatient treatment within the last 12 months. No indication of appeal in the record.920514: BUPERS directed the applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense. You may obtain a copy of DoD Directive 1332.28 by writing to: DA Military Review Boards...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01005

    Original file (ND03-01005.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-01005 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030516. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. 910723: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence 0500, 910613 to 0730, 910628 (15 days/surrendered).

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00500

    Original file (ND99-00500.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Decision A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 991213. Specifically, the Former Service Member (FSM) is seeking an upgrade inhis discharge from Other Than Honorable (OTH) to Honorable or General, Under Honorable Conditions.The FSM contends his discharge was not due to his conduct. Relief not warranted.The applicant’s third issue, stated by the DAV, contends the applicant was discharged due to a miscommunication between himself and other personnel rather than...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00081

    Original file (ND02-00081.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00081 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 011011, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. The Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) also advised that the board first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing. 920207: USS CONSTELLATION (CV-64) notified applicant of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-01326

    Original file (ND04-01326.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the Applicant’s service was discovered by the NDRB. This misconduct resulted in four separate nonjudicial punishment proceedings for violations of UCMJ Articles 86, 91, 92, and 112a. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00362

    Original file (ND00-00362.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The discharge shall remain: UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/MISCONDUCT – Commission of a serious offense, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.The NDRB did note an administrative error on the original DD Form 214. No indication of appeal in the record.910920: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under Other Than Honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the Commission of a serious offense as evidenced by violation of UCMJ, Article 91: Failure to...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01444

    Original file (ND03-01444.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-01444 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030903. I WAS TOLD TO REPORT CAPTAIN MASS AND HE INFORMED ME THAT BECAUSE I HAD BEEN WRITTEN UP 3 TIMES AND THAT IT SHOWS A PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT AND HE RECOMMEND THAT I BE DISCHARGED UNDER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS. The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of discharge.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00790

    Original file (ND03-00790.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 Character/job reference, undated Twenty pages from Applicant’s service American Legion’s comments, dated April 13, 2004 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 900419 - 900918 COG Active: None Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 900919 Date of...