Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00252
Original file (ND01-00252.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-SR, USN
Docket No. ND01-00252

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 001228, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to Honorable. The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. The applicant listed a civilian counsel as the representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 010629. 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. I joined the Navy at the age of 17. I had not completed high school. At the advise of my recruiter I recieved my G.E.D. and entered the Navy. I originally was scheduled o attend submarine school and then electronics technician. Because of my lack of prior education and immaturity I did not complete sub school, was not given a security clearance and never started ET school. I was transferred to a surface ship as an undesignated seamen. I feel that I was too immature to join the USN in the first place. My mind was not capable of seeing the big picture and a result I was a disciplinary problem. Acting on the advise of fellow sailors I chose to take several unauthorized leaves of absence, hoping to be removed from the Navy. Since my discharge I have held an EMT license, have been employed and have had no criminal activity, I am now a full time firefighter. I would like tol put this mistake behind me.

 Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
Copy of certificate of completion of Emergency Medical Technician dated June 4, 1991
Letter to applicant from Black Jack Fire Protection District dated June 26, 2000
Letter to applicant from Christian Hospital dated January 19, 1999
Copy of certificate dated October 3, 1998

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: None
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     890309 - 890319  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 890320                        Date of Discharge: 910111

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 01 09 22 or 25
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 17 Parental Consent                Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 11                                 AFQT: 63

 Highest Rate: SA

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.20 (2)    Behavior: 3.20 (2)                OTA: 3.30

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: None

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: 83

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 :

890705:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86 (2 specs): (1) Go from his watch with intent to abandon on 0550, 17Jun89, (2) Fail to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty on 0715, 24Jun89.
         Award: Correctional custody for 30 days, reduction to SR. Reduction suspended for 6 months. No indication of appeal in the record.
890705:  Retention Warning from Naval Submarine School: Advised of deficiency (Abandoning watch or guard and failing to go to appointed place of duty at the prescribed time.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

891130:  Retention Warning from USS PEORIA (LST 1183: Advised of deficiency (Unknown.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning. [Extracted from CO's message dated 2Dec90.]

 891204:  Applicant to unauthorized absence 0715, 4Dec89.

 891212:  Applicant from unauthorized absence 0040, 12Dec89 (7 days/surrendered).

891215:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Absence from unit.
         Award: Forfeiture of $345 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 21 days, reduction to SR. No indication of appeal in the record.
891215:  Retention Warning from USS PEORIA (LST 1183): Advised of deficiency (Below average performance and non-conformity to naval rules and authority.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

900714:  Applicant to unauthorized absence 0700, 14Jul90.

 900811:  Applicant from unauthorized absence 1503, 11Aug90 (28 days/surrendered).
900822:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence.
         Award: Forfeiture of $405 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days. No indication of appeal in the record.
900928:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86 (2 specs): Failure to make restricted men's muster on 26Aug90 and 29Aug90.
         Award: Restriction and extra duty for 4 days. No indication of appeal in the record.
901003:  Applicant to unauthorized absence 2130, 3Oct90.

901102:  Applicant declared a deserter.

 901120:  Applicant from unauthorized absence 1530, 20Nov90 (48 days/surrendered).
901128:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence, violation of UCMJ, Article 134: Breaking restriction.
         Award: Forfeiture of $362 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days. No indication of appeal in the record.
901130:  USS PEORIA (LST 1183) 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. [Extracted from CO's message dated 2Dec90.]
901130:          Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ, Article 27B, elected to waive all rights. [Extracted from CO's message dated 2Dec90.]
901202:  Commanding officer recommended discharge under Other Than Honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a Pattern of misconduct and misconduct due to Commission of a serious offense. Commanding officer’s comments (verbatim): SR (applicant's) performance onboard PERORIA has been marked by periods of unauthorized absences. Despite repeated counseling at all levels of the chain of command and a page 13 warning issued on 13 Nov89, he broke restriction on 3 Oct and was absent for 48 days. SR (applicant) is detrimental to good order and discipline and is therefore recommended for immediate separation on an other than honorable basis for misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.

910104:  CNMPC 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 910111 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).

Issue 1. The applicant states he was too immature to join the Navy and since his discharge he has held an EMT license, been employed and had no criminal activity. The Board determined the applicant’s discharge was proper and equitable. Normally, to permit relief, an error or injustice must have existed during the period of enlistment in question. No such error or injustice occurred during the applicant’s enlistment. Additionally, 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 the service. However, the NDRB is authorized to consider outstanding post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge, 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. Verifiable proof of any post-service accomplishments must be provided in order for the applicant to claim post-service conduct and behavior as a reason to upgrade a less than Honorable discharge. Evidence of continuing educational pursuits, an employment record, documentation of community service, certification of non-involvement with civil authorities and proof of his not using drugs, are examples of verifiable documents that should have been provided to receive consideration for clemency, based on post-service conduct. The applicant did not provide sufficient documentation to warrant an upgrade to his discharge. He is reminded that he remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of his discharge. The applicant can provide additional documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments at that time. Legal representation at a personal appearance hearing is highly recommended but not required. Relief denied.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

 A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560A, Change 8 effective 21 Aug 89 until 14 Aug 91), 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 “ afls10.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 | ND99-00548

    Original file (ND99-00548.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-SR, USN Docket No. I seriously overslept in which I had duty that day my friends left me behind, I was punished for that incident but that started a little anymosity toward me from the people that was above me including a couple petty officers who were new to the command. Award: Forfeiture of $335 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to SR. No indication of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00849

    Original file (ND99-00849.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    No indication of appeal in the record.930202: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 134: Drinking on restriction on 1Feb93. No indication of appeal in the record.930202: USS WICHITA (AOR-11) 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 NJP's of 23Oc91, 13Nov91, 11Sep92, 28Dec92 and 2Feb93 and misconduct due to commission of a serious offense as evidenced by wrongful use...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00055

    Original file (ND00-00055.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).In the applicant’s issue 1, the Board determined this issue is without merit. Unfortunately, the NDRB is under no obligation to upgrade a discharge because the ex-member was young, stupid and immature, at the time of his service, or because the member wants a discharge he can proudly display. The NDRB reviews the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00072

    Original file (ND99-00072.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I didn't know how to cope with the loss of my mother at the time of my active duty. Sincerly Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 Twelve 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) 840531 - 840717 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 840718...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00318

    Original file (ND01-00318.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-SR, USN Docket No. The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. 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 Board found no decisional issues in the applicant’s latter.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00251

    Original file (ND01-00251.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    No indication of appeal in the record.931123: [USS SPARTANBURG COUNTY (LST-1192)] 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 all punishments under the UCMJ in your current enlistment.931123: Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ, Article 27B, elected to waive all rights except the right to obtain copies of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00027

    Original file (ND99-00027.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I am asking for an upgrade in order to obtain the VA benefits I am a veteran who served proudly in time of war and the type of discharge I received, has left its mark against me. At this time, the applicant has not provided any documentation of good character and conduct. In issues 8 and 9, the applicant states that “medical or physical problems” and “certain other problems impaired my ability to serve.” A medical, diagnosis on active duty or during post-service, and whether proper or...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00789

    Original file (ND01-00789.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. No indication of appeal in the record.890812: [USS TRUXTON (CGN-35)] 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 your six Commanding Officer's non-judicial punishments and two page 13's dated 861203 and 890321 and misconduct...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00858

    Original file (ND04-00858.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION 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): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 900810 - 901114 COG Active: None Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 901115 Date of Discharge: 920713 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 01 07 09 (Accounts for lost...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01304

    Original file (ND03-01304.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :890626: Applicant to active duty for 48 months under the TAR Enlistment Program.900517: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86 (2 specs): (1) Unauthorized absence on 0515, 900424 to 0540, 900425 (1 day), (2) Unauthorized absence from 0500, 900503 to 1419, 900505 (2 days). No indication of appeal in the...