Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00221
Original file (ND01-00221.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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


ex-OSSR, USN
Docket No. ND01-00221

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 001215, 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 010524. 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)/Misconduct - Pattern of misconduct, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.





PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues (verbatim)

1. Dear Sir or Ma'am,

 I would like to ask that the circumstances of my discharge be reviewed.
 Thank you very much for your kind attention to this matter.

Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
Copy of Certificate of Completion dated April 7, 2000
Copy of Bachelor of Arts degree dated August 28, 1998

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: None
          Inactive: USNR (DEP)     870724 - 871027  COG
Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 871028               Date of Discharge: 891004
Length of Service (years, months, days):

          Active: 01 11 07
          Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 18                          Years Contracted: 4
Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 53

 Highest Rate: OSSA
Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 2.70 (2)    Behavior: 2.20 (2)                OTA: 3.00
Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: None

Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

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

UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL)/Misconduct - Pattern of misconduct, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.
Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

880318:  Psychiatric evaluation: Applicant diagnosed with a personality disorder with antisocial and narcissistic features.
880909:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92 (2 specs):
 Specification 1: Disobeying a lawful order on 20Aug88.
Specification 2: Disobeying a lawful order on 6Sep88.
         Award: Forfeiture of $150 per month for 1 month, restriction and extra duty for 20 days. No indication of appeal in the record.
880909:  Retention Warning from USS LEAHY (CG 16): Advised of deficiency (Disobeying a lawful order (2 specs).), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

890303:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Absent from appointed place of duty on 25Feb89.
         Award: Restriction and extra duty for 5 days. No indication of appeal in the record.
890303:  Retention Warning from USS LEAHY (CG 16): Advised of deficiency (Absent from appointed place of duty.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

890511:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Absent from appointed place of duty on 26Apr89; violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Disobeying a lawful order.
         Award: Correctional custody for 30 days. No indication of appeal in the record.
890511:  Retention Warning from USS LEAHY (CG 16): Advised of deficiency (Absent from appointed place of duty and disobeying a lawful order.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.
        
890615:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 91: Disrespect toward a petty officer on 2Jun89; violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Disobeying a lawful order on 2Jun89.
         Award: Forfeiture of $344 per month for 2 months, restriction for 60 days, reduction to OSSR. No indication of appeal in the record.
890629:  USS LEAHY (CG 16) 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 four NJP's in one enlistment.
890710:          Applicant advised of his rights and having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to appear before an Administrative Discharge Board.
890731:  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, that the misconduct warranted separation, and recommended discharge under honorable conditions (general).
890808:  Commanding officer recommended discharge under honorable conditions (general) by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.

890925:  CNMPC directed the applicant's discharge under honorable conditions (general) 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 891004 under honorable conditions (general) for misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct (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).
In response to the applicant’s issue, the Board found that the discharge was proper and equitable. The applicant received four NJP’s and three retention warnings in less than a year for violations of UCMJ Articles 86, 91, and 92. In addition, an Administrative Discharge Board unanimously found the applicant had committed misconduct and warranted a general discharge. The Board finds no reason to grant relief at this time.
The following is provided for the applicant’s edification. 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 a teaching certificate and a Bachelor of Arts degree as documentation of his post-service. The applicant's efforts need to be more encompassing than those provided. The applicant should have produced evidence of 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. At this time the applicant has not provided sufficient documentation of good character and 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 15560A, Change 7, effective 25 May 89 until 20 Aug 89), Article 3630600, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT - A PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT.

B. Under the Manual for Courts-Martial, a punitive discharge is authorized for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Article 92, for disobeying a direct order, if adjudged at a Special or General Court-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 | 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 | ND99-00609

    Original file (ND99-00609.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 860314 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct pattern frequent involvement of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities (A and 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 (D and E).The applicant introduced...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00226

    Original file (ND03-00226.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-00226 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 021121, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. No indication of appeal in the record.921215: USS KIRK (FF-1087) notified Applicant of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and commission of a serious offense.930122: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: UA on 930111. ...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00982

    Original file (ND02-00982.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 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: None Active: None Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 870114 Date of Discharge: 881208 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 01 02 25 Inactive: 00 07 29 The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-01039

    Original file (ND99-01039.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Commanding officer’s comments (verbatim): "I strongly agree with the Board's findings and recommend that OSSR (Applicant) be administratively discharged from the naval service by reason of his misconduct due to commission of a serious offense and misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct, and that the characterization of his discharge be under Other Than Honorable conditions. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00201

    Original file (ND99-00201.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND99-00201 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 981119, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable and the reason for the discharge be changed to convenience of the government, and change the re-enlistment code to RE-1. The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. Age at Entry: 19 Years Contracted: 4 Education Level: 12 AFQT: 31 Highest Rate: RMSA Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00008

    Original file (ND99-00008.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    No indication of appeal in the record.890306: USS Theodore Roosevelt (CVN-71) notified applicant of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of alcohol abuse rehabilitation failure, by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense and by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.890306: Applicant advised of his rights and having not consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to appear before an...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00258

    Original file (ND03-00258.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    At this time, the applicant has not provided any documentation for the Board to consider. Therefore, no relief will be granted.The applicant is reminded that he is eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of his discharge. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00105

    Original file (ND01-00105.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00640

    Original file (ND99-00640.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    My discharge was improper because it was based on 8 days of time lost during my 3 years 1 month 21 days of service with no other adverse action. 841015: Surrendered on board at 0715 (3 days). No indication of appeal in the record.841101: Retention Warning from USS CANOPUS: Advised of deficiency (violation of UCMJ Article 92 - disobeying a lawful order, disrespect to a petty officer and failure to obey order/regulation), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of...