Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00385
Original file (ND01-00385.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-MMFR, USN
Docket No. ND01-00385

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 010207, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The applicant requested a personal appearance hearing discharge review. The applicant listed the American Legion as the representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A personal appearance discharge review hearing was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 020418. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, NDRB discerned an inequity existed in the applicant’s discharge. The Board’s vote was unanimous that the character of the discharge shall change. The discharge shall change to: HONORABLE/Misconduct, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

A personal appearance discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on XXXXXX. 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, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

 If appropriate add the following:
The NDRB did note an administrative error on the original DD Form 214. Block 28, Narrative Reason for Separation should read: “_____________” vice “__________”. The original DD Form 214 should be corrected or reissued as appropriate.








THE FINDING FOR MISCONDUCT IS EFFECTIVE FOR 940722 - 961002. ONLY.

SPN CODE HKQ EFFECTIVE 930628 - PRESENT . A general discharge is written “GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)”.

 NOTE: NAVADMIN 149-96 (EFFECTIVE 6 JUN 96) DELEGATED SEPARATION AUTHORITY TO THE SPECIAL COURT-MARTIAL CONVENING AUTHORITIES (SPCMCA) OR THE GENERAL COURT-MARTIAL CONVENING AUTHORITIES (GCMCA), AS APPROPRIATE. MILPERSMAN CHAPTER 36, CHANGE 4, 03 OCT 96 IMPLEMENTED THESE CHANGES.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

1. (Equity Issue) This former member opines that her post-service conduct has been sufficiently creditable to warrant the Board’s clemency relief as authorized under provisions of SECNAVINST 5420.174C, enclosure (1), paragraph 9.3.

 Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
American Legion statement, 18 April 2002
Packet from applicant, 18 April 2002

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: None
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     930220 - 930622  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 930623               Date of Discharge: 950131

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 01 07 09
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 30                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 52

 Highest Rate: MMFA

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 2.00 (1)    Behavior: 1.00 (1)                OTA: 2.00

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM, SASM

Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

941230:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Failure to obey a lawful order on 22Dec94.
         Award: Forfeiture of $416 per month for 2 months, restriction for 60 days, reduction to MMFR. Forfeiture suspended. No indication of appeal in the record.
941230:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.
941231:          Applicant advised of her 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 the documents used to support the basis for the separation.
950103:  Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense. Commanding officer’s comments (verbatim): MMFR (applicant) violated and refuses to comply with the Navy's policy on fraternization. She was warned at Captain's call on numerous occasions that the Navy's fraternization policy would be enforced and not to cross the bounds of professional relationships with other crew members. Her conduct has been prejudicial to good order and discipline and has undermined a healthy command climate in CIMARRON. FR (applicant) is a 32 year old adult who is fully accountable and comply with the Navy's fraternization policy. MMFR (applicant) has not been onboard CIMARRON long enough to receive a periodic performance evaluation. Her professional performance is characterized with numerous formal counseling chits and countless informal counseling sessions. If a performance eval was to be submitted on her today it would place her as a 2.8 to 3.0 sailor overall with grades scattered from 2.6 to 3.4. Recommend SNM be separated with characterization of service as other than honorable.

950106:  BUPERS directed the applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.

 990830:  NDRB documentary record review Docket Number ND98-01200 conducted. Determination: discharge proper and equitable; relief not warranted.

RECORDER: CO's letter dated 6Jan95 shows two NJP's in the subject line but is not found anywhere else in the record.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 950131 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 improper (C and D).

Issue 1. The Board found that an inequity existed in the fact that the applicant was involuntary separated for the commission of a serious offense, which consisted of the applicant, then an E-2, and a male E-4 staying in the same room overnight in a hotel while on liberty in Hong Kong. The Board determined that involuntarily separating an enlisted member for fraternizing with another enlisted member not in her chain of command is inconsistent with standards of discipline in the naval service [B]. Additionally, after consideration of the applicant’s post-service conduct, the Board found the sum of all factors sufficient to warrant an upgrade of her discharge to Honorable. Relief is granted.

 Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

 A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 9, effective
22 Jul 94 until 02 Oct 96, 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 " 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 | 2000_Navy | ND00-00907

    Original file (ND00-00907.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    950131: Vacated suspended forfeiture awarded at CO's NJP dated 22Sep94 due to continued misconduct.950131: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86 (2 specs): (1) Unauthorized absence 24Oct94 to 27Oct94 (3 days), (2) Unauthorized absence 29Nov94 to 6Dec94 (7 days), violation of UCMJ Article 87: Miss ship's movement on 24Oc94. On 27 Oct 94 FR (applicant) was contacted by a USS ANZIO commissioned officer and instructed to report immediately to DESRON 2 IOT arrange another flight. At this time,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00811

    Original file (ND99-00811.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND99-00811 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 990525, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable and the reason for the discharge be changed to Secretarial Authority. Decision A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 000222. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-01017

    Original file (ND01-01017.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    My discharge is, I must say that I am pleased with the discharge I have now, during the time that I was in the Navy I had gotten in pregnant and stayed away from my command for a short time. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of Adverse Performance Evaluation Report Copies of DD Form 214 (2) Copies of Enlisted Performance Evaluation Reports (4pgs) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00590

    Original file (ND01-00590.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION 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).Issue 1. The Board considers this a none decisional issue.

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-01130

    Original file (ND99-01130.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Issues Prior to the documentary discharge review, the applicant introduced no issues as block 8 on the DD Form 293 is blank. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Statement from applicant Letter from applicant to Board for Correction of Naval Records dated September 25, 1998 Copy of DD Form 214. You should read Enclosure (5) of the Directive before submitting such a complaint.

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00870

    Original file (ND99-00870.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND99-00870 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 990609, 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. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 980211 under other than...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00300

    Original file (ND00-00300.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: USNR (DEP) 960118 - 960220 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 960221 Date of Discharge: 980805 Length of Service (years, months, days): Active: 02 05 15 Inactive: None Age at Entry: 18 Years Contracted: 4...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00752

    Original file (ND99-00752.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND99-00752 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 990510, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions or entry level separation and the reason for the discharge be changed. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Letter from applicant (3pgs) Copies of DD Form...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00546

    Original file (ND03-00546.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events : 930520: Reenlisted for 5 years on-board USS VINCENNES (CG 49).931208: Executive Officer, Naval Amphibious Base, Coronado, advised Applicant that he was not in compliance with Navy Physical Fitness Standards due to being 29% body fat and ordered to report to the Command Physical Fitness Coordinator for enrollment in the Command Physical Conditioning Program.941114: Counseling: Advised of deficiency (failing the PRT/bodyfat cycle for the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-01171

    Original file (ND01-01171.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-01171 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010917, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to 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 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: USN None Inactive: USNR (DEP) 940624 -...