Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00176
Original file (ND01-00176.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-YNSR, USN
Docket No. ND01-00176

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 001127, 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 010503. 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 HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL)/Separation in lieu of trial by court martial, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630650.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

1. No issues other than I am I school, full-time, and wish to be eligible for the GI Bill.


 Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
Copy of DD Form 214 (2 copies)

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: None
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     910426 - 910430  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 910501               Date of Discharge: 930816

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 02 03 16
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 18                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 11 GED           AFQT: 43

 Highest Rate: YNSA

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 2.87 (3)    Behavior: 2.93 (3)                OTA: 3.00

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM, OSR

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

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

UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL)/separation in lieu of trial by court martial, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630650.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

911224:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 91: Disrespectful in language toward a superior petty officer on 5Dec91, violation of UCMJ, Article 116: Breach of peace by making excessive noise and using provoking language toward another person on 5Dec91.
         Award: Forfeiture of 7 days pay of $120, restriction and extra duty for 14 days, reduction to YNSR. No indication of appeal in the record.
920323:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 134: Disorderly which was of a nature to bring discredit upon the Armed Forces on 16Feb92.
         Award: Forfeiture of 7 days pay, restriction and extra duty for 14 days. Forfeiture and restriction suspended for 4 months. No indication of appeal in the record.
920323:  Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (On 16 February 1992, you were disrespectful to a superior petty officer. On 5 December 1991, you were disrespectful in language toward a superior petty officer. These two incidents also indicate that your conduct was disorderly.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

920707:  Vacate suspended forfeiture of $183.00 and restriction for 14 days awarded at CO's NJP dated 23Mar92.
920707:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 117: Wrongfully using provoking words on 18May92.
         Award: Extra duty for 14 days. No indication of appeal in the record.
920707:  Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (On 18 May 1992, you were disrespectful in language toward a superior petty officer. Because of this report of offense you were referred to Captains mast on 7 July 1992 which also vacated your previous NJP on 23 March 1992.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

920817:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 134: Disorderly conduct bringing discredit upon the Armed Forces.
         Award: Forfeiture of 7 days pay of $183, restriction and extra duty for 14 days. No indication of appeal in the record.
921027:  An Administrative Discharge Board, based upon a preponderance of the evidence and by unanimous vote, found that the applicant had committed a pattern of misconduct, and recommended retention.

921030:  Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (Unsatisfactory conduct and personal behavior, and frequent involvement with military authorities.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

930318:  Counseling: Advised of deficiency (personal behavior and disobeying direct order from CO of NSA), notified of corrective actions and assistance available.

930701:  Charges preferred to special court-martial for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) Article 86: Absence without leave, Article 92 (2 specs): Failure to obey an order or regulation; Article 134 (3 specs): Disorderly conduct, unlawful entry, and communicating a threat.

930706:  A pplicant requested an administrative discharge under honorable conditions (general) in lieu of a trial by court-martial. He consulted with counsel and was fully advised of the implications of his request. The applicant stated he understood the elements of the offense(s) with which he was charged, and admitted he was guilty of all the charges preferred against him. Specifically, he admitted to violating UCMJ, Article 86: Absence without leave, Article 92 (2 specs): Failure to obey an order or regulation; Article 134 (3 specs): Disorderly conduct, unlawful entry, and communicating a threat. The applicant stated he was completely satisfied with the counsel he had received. The applicant understood that if discharged under other than honorable conditions, it might deprive him of virtually all veterans' benefits based upon his current enlistment, and that he might expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life in situations wherein the type of service rendered or the character of discharge received therefrom may have a bearing.

930713:  The commanding officer, exercising GCMCA, approved the request for an administrative separation characterized as general under honorable conditions in lieu of a trial by court-martial, and directed applicant’s discharge.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 930816 under honorable conditions (general) in lieu of a trial by court-martial (A and B). The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (C). 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).

The applicant requested an upgrade to his discharge in order to be eligible for the GI Bill. The NDRB has no authority in matters concerning GI Bill benefits. Relief is not warranted.

 The applicant 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 3630650, PROCEDURES FOR PROCESSING ENLISTED PERSONNEL FOR SEPARATION IN LIEU OF TRIAL BY COURTMARTIAL.

B. A punitive bad conduct discharge may be adjudged for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Article 91, 92, 116, 117, 134 upon conviction by a Special or General Court-Martial, in accordance with the Manual for Courts-Martial.

C. 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.

D. 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.

E. 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 | 2002_Navy | ND02-00019

    Original file (ND02-00019.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00019 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010927, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. 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).Issues 1 and 2 state that the applicant’s discharge was inequitable because it was based on a couple of isolated but linked incidents after 26...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00401

    Original file (ND02-00401.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00401 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020225, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions. The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. No indication of appeal in the record.930305: Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (Insubordinate conduct toward a senior petty officer, disrespectful in language), notified of corrective actions and assistance...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-01132

    Original file (ND04-01132.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND04-01132 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20040707. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. 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 | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500647

    Original file (ND0500647.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. requested an administrative discharge under other than honorable conditions in lieu of a trial by court-martial. Relief is not warranted.The Applicant contends that his discharge should be upgraded because he was suffering from a mental condition while on active duty.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501360

    Original file (ND0501360.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. 910923: An Administrative Discharge Board, based upon a preponderance of the evidence and by unanimous vote, found that the Applicant had committed misconduct due to commission of a serious offense as evidenced by his enlisted service record, that such misconduct warranted separation, and recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions. Commanding...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00048

    Original file (ND00-00048.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00048 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 991013, 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:Record Check from Department of Veterans Affairs Copy of DD Form 214 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: USN None Inactive:...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00495

    Original file (ND02-00495.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).The Applicant presented no issues, however, he did request an upgrade of his discharge to general (under honorable conditions.) The Applicant The Applicant’s misconduct is clearly documented in the service record.

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-01062

    Original file (ND99-01062.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND99-01062 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 990803, requested that the characterization of service on the 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. In response to applicants issue 2, the Board has no authority to change re-enlistment codes or make recommendations to permit...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00366

    Original file (ND00-00366.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Sentence: Bad Conduct discharge. The applicant was discharged with a BAD CONDUCT discharge from a special court martial. 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 D.C. 20374-5023

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01471

    Original file (ND03-01471.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. 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 introduced no decisional issues for consideration by the Board. The Applicant’s misconduct is clearly documented.