Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00478
Original file (ND01-00478.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-ASAN, USN
Docket No. ND01-00478

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 010307, 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 010907. 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/ PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-140 (formerly 3630600).

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

 1. My evals throughout my four year shows that I was a good sailor, and deserve a honorable discharge.

2. I did four years honorable and only had four months left in the service when I was discharged.

Documentation
In addition to the service record, PARTIAL DISCHARGE PACKAGE AVAILABLE, 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):
         Active: USN                        None
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     920623 - 931108  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 931109               Date of Discharge: 980605

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 04 06 27
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 18                          Years Contracted: 4 (11 months extension)

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 53

 Highest Rate: AS3

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.90 (2)    Behavior: 4.00 (2)                OTA: 4.00 (4.0 evals)
                  3.20 (5)                 2.00 (5)                          2.83 (5.0 evals)

Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM, NAVY"E"RIBBON (2), SSDR, AFSM, NM, JMUC, NUC, HSM

Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-140 (formerly 3630600).

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

940502:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92: (2 Specifications), Failure to obey a lawful order or regulation.
         Award: Forfeiture of $192.00 per month for 1 month. No indication of appeal in the record.

950919:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Failure to obey a general regulation, violation of UCMJ Article 134: Underage drinking.
         Award: Forfeiture of $200.00 per month for 1 month, restriction and extra duty for 21 days. No indication of appeal in the record.

970731:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 91: Insubordinate conduct toward a warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer.
         Award: Correctional Custody for 30 days, forfeiture of $553.50 per month for 2 months, reduction to E-3. No indication of appeal in the record.

980312:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 91: Insubordinate conduct toward a warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer.
         Award: Forfeiture of $519.15 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days to the limits of USS TRENTON (LPD-14) at Norfolk, VA., reduction to E-2. No indication of appeal in the record.

980323:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct as evidenced by CO's mast on 980312 for violation of UCMJ Article 91, Insubordinate Conduct Toward a Petty Officer; CO's mast on 970731 for violation of UCMJ Article 91, Insubordinate Conduct Toward a Petty Officer; CO's mast on 950919 for violation of UCMJ Article 92, Failure to Obey an Order or Regulation and violation of UCMJ Article 134, Underage Drinking; CO's mast on 940502 for violation of UCMJ Article 92, Failure to Obey an Order or Regulation.
980325:          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 the documents used to support the basis for the separation

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 980605 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).

 The applicant’s first issue states: “My evals throughout my four year shows that I was a good sailor, and deserve a honorable discharge.” The Board reviewed the applicant’s entire service record and found a well documented pattern of misconduct. During his enlistment, the applicant was found guilty on four separate occasions of committing serious military offenses. The applicant’s evaluations were considered in the review, however the Board found the applicant’s misconduct significantly overshadowed his positive contributions. The Other Than Honorable discharge accurately characterizes the applicant’s service. Relief is denied.

The applicant’s second issue states: “I did four years honorable and only had four months left in the service when I was discharged.” The record shows the applicant was discharged for a pattern of misconduct (four NJP’s in his enlistment). The applicant failed to abide by the UCMJ during his enlistment and was discharged prior to the expiration of his obligated service. The Board found no impropriety or inequity in the discharge assigned. Relief is not warranted.

 The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the re characterization of a discharge. 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, may be considered by the NDRB. The applicant failed to provide documentary evidence to demonstrate his sobriety, positive community service, employment history, and clean police record. 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 recommended .




Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

 A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 18, effective
12 Dec 1997 until Present, Article 1910-140 (formerly 3630600), SEPARATION BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT - 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 | ND99-00957

    Original file (ND99-00957.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND99-00957 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 990709, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. At the conclusion of the second Commanding Officer's punishment proceedings I was told I would be discharged from the Navy with a General Discharge under Honorable Conditions. However, after the fact, when I reviewed my discharge papers, I discovered that I had in fact received an other than...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00305

    Original file (ND00-00305.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Navy had changed my life so much for the better. Award: Correctional custody for 30 days. 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 response to the applicant’s issue 1, the Board disagrees with the applicant’s statement that “what had happened was an extreme abuse of power on the Captain’s part.” The applicant only served for one year and 5 months...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00808

    Original file (ND01-00808.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I was a day away from honorable. Age at Entry: 18 Years Contracted: 3 Education Level: 12 AFQT: 32 Highest Rate: FN Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks): Performance: 2.50 (2) Behavior: 2.00 (2) OTA: 2.40 (5.0 Evals) Military Decorations: None Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: SSDR, JMUC Days of Unauthorized Absence: None Character, Narrative Reason, and Authority of Discharge (at time of issuance):GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-01281

    Original file (ND02-01281.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-01281 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 20020910, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. No indication of appeal in the record.871204: Vacate suspended restriction for 20 days, reduction to BMSN awarded at CO's NJP dated 871029 due to continued misconduct.871204: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 91: Insubordinate conduct toward officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer. PART III – RATIONALE...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501469

    Original file (ND0501469.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of 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:Applicant’s DD Form 214 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 19880629 – 19880629 COG Active: None Period of Service Under Review :Date...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01234

    Original file (ND03-01234.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions. The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, reflects his willful failure to meet the requirements of his contract with the U.S. Navy and falls far short of that required for an upgrade of his characterization of service. The names, and votes of the members of the Board are recorded on...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500960

    Original file (ND0500960.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. No indication of appeal in the record.941202: Retention Warning from USS CALIFORNIA (CGN 36): Advised of deficiency (Violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice Articles 86 (Failure to go to appointed place of duty) and 90 (Willful disobedience of a superior commissioned officer), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00718

    Original file (ND99-00718.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 980206 general (under honorable conditions) for misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct (A). The applicant You should read Enclosure (5) of the Directive before submitting such a complaint.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00455

    Original file (ND00-00455.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00455 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000229, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. This is not an issue for which the Board will grant relief.

  • 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.