Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00443
Original file (ND01-00443.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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


ex-SMSR, USN
Docket No. ND01-00443

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 010222, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The applicant requested a personal appearance hearing discharge review before a traveling panel closest to Phoenix, AZ. The applicant did not list any representative on the DD Form 293. In the acknowledgement letter to the applicant, he was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) does not travel, all hearings are held in the Washington, DC Area.

Decision

A personal appearance discharge review hearing was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 020326. 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 at the time of issue. 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- commission of a serious offense, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

A documentary 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 – commission of a serious offense, 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.







THIS SHELL IS FOR COSO.

THE FINDING FOR MISCONDUCT IS EFFECTIVE FOR 870615 - 890110 ONLY. A general discharge is written “UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL)”.
SPN CODE HKQ THE SPN CODE IS EFFECTIVE 860911 - 930627.


PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION


Issues (verbatim)

 1. As per form 293's instructions, I am writing a brief explanation as to why I feel and respectfully request that my "Other Than Honorable" discharge from December 3, 1987 is changed to an Honorable discharge. Attached is my current cover letter and resume for the committee's review. Within my resume you will see my professional achievements over the past 14 years, as well as my educational advancement and continued discipline to further my education and professional careers. In addition to my performance history since being discharged from the Navy, I wanted to add what I've come to understand over the years on why I didn't fulfill the agreed 4 year contract with the U.S. Navy. I don't like to say "couldn't" fulfill, but then maybe it was a couldn't. I had just turned 17 years of age and I had been in some minor trouble with the law (kid stuff) and school was very boring for me. So, I wanted to find a way out, without being a burden to my parents. My father, a very successful operation manager in the corporate world and a loving father, my mother a loving and dedicated woman whose only concern was to her husband and children. My father served in the Navy in his youth and I thought, that would be the key of me, as is helped him and gave him some of the tools that made him the great man that he had become. I had begged my parent to sign for me to get in at such an early age. At first they both had their reserves in do so, but I had a way of getting my way with threats and finally them agreed (with my father agreeing more) to sign. I had dropped out of school and received my GED in order to be enlisted. I don't want to drag the fact out, but I will continue with a bit of the history while I was in the Navy for almost two years. I had done very well in boot camp and went onto Signalmen "A" School after graduation. In doing so, I had graduated 2 nd in my class and got to pick where I wanted to go. My father had served on a Destroyer, so I wanted to do the same. I was assigned to the USS Ingersoll (DD-990), stationed in Long Beach. I took several weeks leave and off I went. To my surprise, my ship wasn't in the water and ready to go. We were "dry dock" in San Pedro, south of Long Beach. This lasted 6 or so months and that's where it started, six plus months "dry dock" in a small town at 17 years old 2000+ miles from home for the first time and with people a lot older that I was. All the was to do after quitting time was to drink and drink a lot, yea, it was fun at the time, but it wasn't what I joined the Navy for. I rapidly became soured on the Navy and didn't like what I was becoming. For the first time in my life, I had gotten myself into something that my parents couldn't get me out of. That was very harsh reality for a seventeen year old that never had to worry about a thing. So, I thought if I did a couple things that were not allowed, but not bay, they (The Navy) would let me out with an Honorable Discharge, without benefits. Therefore I wouldn't disgrace my mother and father and be able to work on my career, without having to lie or not say I was in the Military, with fear that with an "Other Than Honorable" discharge, I would be looked poorly upon. I have come to understand, explaining that I was only 17 wasn't good enough for the Other Than Honorable discharge I had received.
I look back and I am so very sorry I didn't complete the journey I had chosen back at the young age of 17, so stupid and clueless, thinking I had all the answers. I guess were all like that one way or another at that age. I hope with all of my heart that a mistake 14+ years ago, can be changed with the person I have become. Still not married yet, but I have turned into a fine upstanding citizen. 32 years old today, working in a promising career and finishing my professional schooling at night. I have learned a great deal over the years and a lot from being in the Navy. Unfortunately, I didn't realize how much of a good thing the Navy is for young men and women, I guess the only the thing the spoiled it for me was after my "A" School I went into dry dock for 6 + months, and looking back that was the thing I couldn't handle and I wouldn't suggest that new comers into the Navy be assigned to a ship that is in "Dry Dock", right from the start. Maybe after a year or two, once they have become accustom to the rules and regulations and the way of life for a person in the Navy. In closing, I will like to add that I had received a commendation from the Captain of a ship ( I forgot the name of the ship, it is in my personal record) that I had participated in sea tactical training for a couple weeks and added a value to the success of the mission. Also, I graduated the top of my "A" School and did very well in boot camp. My trouble started in Dry Docks and there after when I wanted to leave and I didn't know how, so I did some silly stupid seventeen year old stunts that I hope don't have to continue paying for the rest of my life. Please find it in your hearts to overturn the decision that was made to a seventeen year old kid 14+ years ago. I have made my family, friends and employers proud over the years and I hope with the person I have become the Navy would be proud to give me an "Honorable Discharge". When people see what I have done with my life and who I have become as a person, they will think that the Navy had something to do with it, but now I'm ashamed to say I was in the Navy because I don't have an Honorable Discharge". When this wish is granted to change my current discharge to an Honorable one, the Navy will have mad a fine decision and never regret the choice that was made by this committee that stands before me. I will be looking forward to the committee's response via phone, fax, e-mail or U.S. mail to arrange a convenient time when we can meet and talk about the options I have regarding my specific request. If I can be of immediate assistance to the committee in any way at all, please call me directly.
Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
Letter from Applicant (2 copies)
Resume (2pgs) (2 copies)
 Sales summary overview (2pgs)

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: USN                        None
          Inactive: USNR (DEP)     860282 - 860413  COG
Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 860414               Date of Discharge: 871203

 Length of Service (years, months, days):
         Active: 01 03 11
         Inactive: None
Age at Entry: 17                          Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 9                         AFQT: 46
Highest Rate: SMSA

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):
Performance: 2.60 (1)    Behavior: 2.60 (1)                OTA: 2.60

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 OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/Misconduct – commission of a serious offense, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.
Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

861229:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 91: Disobeying a Senior Chief Petty Officer and Senior Petty Officer), violation of UCMJ Article 92: Failure to obey a general regulation.
         Award: Forfeiture of $200.00 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 20 days to USS INGERSOLL (DD-990), reduction to E-1 (suspended for 3 months). No indication of appeal in the record.
870507:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Failure to obey order or regulation, violation of UCMJ Article 113: Misbehavior of Sentinel or lookout, violation of UCMJ Article 86: Absence without leave, violation of UCMJ Article 134: Drunkenness.
         Award: Special Courts-Martial, and 30 days pre-trial confinement. No indication of appeal in the record.

 870507:  Pre-trial confinement from 870507 to 870608.
870608:  Special Court Martial
          Charge I: violation of the UCMJ, Article 92: Derelict in the performance of duty on 870427 by failing to keep a lookout on the signal bridge for approaching dignitaries and high ranking officers; Charge II: violation of the UCMJ, Article 86: Failure to go to appointed place of duty; Charge III: violation of the UCMJ, Article 134: Incapacitated for the proper performance of his duties as a result of overindulgence of intoxicating liquor on 870504.
         Findings: to Charge I, II and III, and specifications thereunder, guilty.
         Sentence: Confinement for 2 months, forfeiture of $425.00 per month for 3 months, reduction to E-1.
         CA 870629: Sentence approved and ordered executed, but execution of that portion of the sentence extending to confinement in excess of 45 days, is suspended for 6 months form the date of trial, at which time, unless sooner vacated, the suspension portion shall be remitted without further action.

870613:  Release from confinement and restored to full duty.

870618:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Failure to obey order or regulation, violation of UCMJ Article 134 (68) Making uttering worthless checks, by dishonorably failing to maintain funds.
         Award: Forfeiture of $200.00 per month for 2 months, restriction to DD990 or NAVSTA PEARL HARBOR. No indication of appeal in the record.

 870702:  Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (Juvenile behavior, disregard for general orders from your superiors, and failure to obey superiors), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

870723:  To confinement.

 870730:  Sentence vacated from previous court martial dated 870608.
870809:  Released from confinement and restored to full duty.
870810:  Pre-trial confinement from 870810 to 870909.
         
870909:  Special Court Martial
          Charge I: violation of the UCMJ, Article 128: Assault.
          Findings: to Charge I and specification thereunder, guilty.
         Sentence: Confinement for 3 months, forfeiture of $450.00 per month for 3 months.
          CA 871005: Only so much of the sentence as provided for confinement at hard labor for 3 months and forfeiture of 438.00 pay per month for 3 months is approved and ordered executed.
871022:  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 nonjudicial punishments on 861229 for disobeying a Senior Chief Petty Officer and Senior Petty Officer and disobeying a general regulation, Special Court-Martial conviction on 870608 for dereliction of duty, nonjudicial punishment on 870618 for failure to obey an order, and Special Court-Martial conviction on 870909 for assault.
871029:          Applicant advised of his rights and having elected 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.
871104:  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): This command contends that SNM’s flagrant disregard for military statutes renders him unfit for continued military service. The record amply attests to his lack of self-discipline and refusal to recognize the seriousness of military service. I recommend that SNM be discharged from the naval service by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense and that the characterization of service be under other than honorable conditions.

871116:  CNMPC directed the applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 871203 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (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).
Issue 1. The Board found that the applicant’s age, education level, and test scores qualified him for enlistment. While he may feel that his youth was a factor that contributed to his actions, the record clearly reflects his willful disregard for the requirements of military discipline and demonstrated that he was unfit for further service. The record is devoid of evidence that the applicant was not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions. Relief denied.
The applicant’s discharge characterization accurately reflects his service to his country. The 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. The applicant was asked to provide supporting documentation concerning his volunteer service, police record, educational pursuits, and character references. The applicant did not provide sufficient documentation to warrant an upgrade to his discharge. Relief denied.



Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)
A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560A), effective 15 Jun 87 until
10 Jan 89, Article 3630600, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED MEMBERS BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT – COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE.
B. Under the Manual for Courts-Martial, a punitive discharge is authorized for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Article 92, for failure to obey order or regulation, 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 | 2002_Navy | ND02-00774

    Original file (ND02-00774.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I feel as though I deserve the G.I Bill because: (1) monies were deducted out of my first years enlistment for that purpose (2) I would have completed my initial 4 year enlistment with an Honorable Discharge had it not been for the 2 year extension that I signed in boot camp. My mother made her condition known to me a long time before I went U.A. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00842

    Original file (ND01-00842.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00842 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010607, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. Documentation In addition to the service record (NO DISCHARGE PACKAGE AVAILABLE), the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copies of DD Form 214 (2) Letter from Applicant Copy of Evaluation...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00881

    Original file (ND01-00881.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    920820: An Administrative Discharge Board, based upon a preponderance of the evidence and by unanimous vote, found that the applicant had a personality disorder and had committed a serious offense, that the misconduct warranted separation, and by a vote of 2 to 1 recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions. An Administrative Discharge Board, based upon a preponderance of the evidence and by unanimous vote, found that the applicant had a personality disorder and had committed...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00343

    Original file (ND01-00343.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    As I previously mentioned the Carl Vinson was having major drug problems and lot sailors were being busted for drugs it was during this time that several of my roommates close friends were busted for drug abuse and put on restriction. We then called in my roommates in and they were asked about three questions in which they denied any involment and then they were dismissed they then called the two friends of my roommates and they both testified under oath about what my roommates had told...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00744

    Original file (ND01-00744.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00744 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010508, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to Honorable. Petty officer W_ comes to the ship and good things go bad again. But when the change of our petty officers and chiefs happened he got a position of power.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500027

    Original file (ND0500027.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The ride out to sea was on my part life threatening, Every time I went underway aboard this destroyer I had to be confined to my rack from seasickness. After a thorough review of the Applicant’s record and issues submitted the Board determined that clemency was not warranted and that the sentence awarded the Applicant at his court-martial was appropriate for the offenses he committed. The Manual for courts-martial authorizes the award of a punitive discharge if adjudged as part of the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00295

    Original file (ND01-00295.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I was 17 years old at the time and that told me that he wanted me out of the picture. (c) Commanding Officer's Nonjudicial punishment of 2 May 1992, for violation of UCMJ Article 121 (larceny).940111: Applicant advised of her rights and having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to appear before an Administrative Discharge Board.920203: An Administrative Discharge Board, based upon a preponderance of the evidence and by unanimous vote, found that the applicant...

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00516

    Original file (MD02-00516.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I was in the Marine corps going on 6 years. If it was serious enough for me to get discharged, then she should have been also. I was discharged 6 days after being told I was receiving another than honorable discharge.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00292

    Original file (ND02-00292.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I was discharged from the navy with other than honorable discharge. NJP this incident, Article 112a, awarded reduction in rate, extra duty and restriction for 45 days and forfeiture of pay of $310.00 for two months. Award: Forfeiture of $319 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to SR. No indication of appeal in the record.870108: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00042

    Original file (ND03-00042.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-00042 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 20021004, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. No indication of appeal in the record.000505: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense and misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.000505: Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to...