Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00659
Original file (ND01-00659.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-ADAR, USN
Docket No. ND01-00659

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 010410, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. The applicant did not list any representative on the DD Form 293. Subsequent to the application for review the applicant obtained Veterans of Foreign Wars as his representative.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 011127. 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. My discharge was inequitable because I had an alcohol abuse problem in which I had no prior affiliation with the alcohol prior to enlistment in the Armed Forces and was never considered for treatment for my first initial warning as a first timer, or any further assistance in correcting this problem.

2. I feel my discharge is improper due to the facts stated in my enlisted performance record copy enclosure (1) state my final performance average as 3.65. I feel that these scores did not hinder my overall advancement in my rating as well as my day to day activities and did not deviate from my performance with my supervisor and peers.

3. Please take in consideration of my accomplishment and personal achievements which I have performed as an enlisted service member, I truly feel these records speak for themselves.

4. (VFW Issue) We request the record be given full consideration for the character of discharge. The applicant had undergone alcohol rehabilitation and has supplied the board with his statement.

We refer this case to the Board for their careful and compassionate consideration and request the applicant's discharge be reviewed for Clemency due to post service.
.

 Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
Copy of DD Form 214
Copy of Enlisted Performance Record
Copy of Navy Occupational Training and Award History Form (4pgs)
Copy of Medical Consultation Sheet

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: USN                        None
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     880729 - 890625  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 890626               Date of Discharge: 920811

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 03 01 16
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 18                          Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 25

 Highest Rate: ADAN

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.48 (5)    Behavior: 3.44 (5)                OTA: 3.64

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: MUC, AFEM, NDSM

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

 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 :

910708   NJP for violation of UCMJ Article 86: Unauthorized absence, violation of UCMJ Article 92: Dereliction of duty.
         Award: CCU for 30 days (suspended for 6 months), forfeiture of $100.00 per month for 1 month, reduction to E-2 (suspended for 6 months) No indication of appeal in the record.
910711:  Civil conviction at San Diego Municipal Court for Battery defined as disorderly conduct under the influence of alcohol or drugs
         Sentence: SMN pleaded NOLO Contendere, 3 years probation, 10 day public service and a diversion program.

911031:  Retention Warning from [HELANTISUBRON FOUR]: Advised of deficiency (Civil misconduct as evidenced by civil court action taken on 910709.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

911031:  Retention Warning from [HELANTISUBRON FOUR]: Advised of deficiency (The making or uttering of checks without sufficient funds.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning
920312:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: (3 Specifications), Unauthorized Absence, Spec 1: Did on or about 1600, 920204, without authority, fail to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty, to wit: duty driver watch, Hanger 340, Naval Air Station, North Island CA, Spec 2: Did on or about 1700, 920218, without authority, fail to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty, to wit: Power Plant shop, Hanger 340, Naval Air Station, North Island CA, Spec 3: Did on or about 0200, 920229, without authority, fail to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty, to wit: Barrack watch, Building 780, Naval Air Station, North Island CA; violation of UCMJ Article 134: (2 Specifications), Spec 1: Was on or about 1630, 920204, as a result of wrongful previous overindulgence in intoxicating liquor, incapacitated for the proper performance of his duties, Spec 2: Was on or about 0530, 920229, as a result of wrongful previous overindulgence in intoxicating liquor, incapacitated for the proper performance of his duties.
Award: Forfeiture of $300.00 per month for 2 months, 60 days restriction to limits of NAS NORTH ISLAND, reduction to E-2. No indication of appeal in the record.
920514:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence, did on or about 0730, 920502 without authority fail to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty, to wit; Hanger 340, Naval Air Station, North Island.
 Restriction to CV-63 for 30 days, reduction to E-1. No indication of appeal in the record.
920614:  [HELANTISUBRON FOUR] notified applicant of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct, commission of a serious offense, and civil conviction.
920619:          Applicant advised of his rights and having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to appear before an Administrative Discharge Board.
920619:  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 other than honorable conditions.

920629:  Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct, commission of a serious offense, and civilian conviction.

920731:  BUPERS 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 920811 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 discharge was inequitable because I had an alcohol abuse problem in which I had no prior affiliation with the alcohol prior to enlistment in the Armed Forces and was never considered for treatment for my first initial warning as a first timer, or any further assistance in correcting this problem.” The applicant’s command was under no obligation to send the member to alcohol rehabilitation treatment unless it was determined, by competent medical authority, that the member was alcohol dependent. There is no documentation in the applicant’s record that shows he was alcohol dependent. The Board determined the discharge was proper and equitable. Relief is denied.

The applicant’s second and third issues state his discharge was improper due to the facts stated in his enlisted performance record, and his final performance average was 3.65. He feels that his scores did not hinder his overall advancement in his rating, as well as my day to day activities and he did not deviate from his performance with his supervisors and peers. The applicant feels his record speaks for itself. The Board read and listened to the applicant’s service record and determined there was no impropriety or inequity in the execution of the discharge procedures or the characterization. The negative aspects of the applicant’s service (three NJP’s and a civil conviction) clearly outweigh his positive contributions. Relief is denied.

 The applicant’s fourth issue states: “(VFW Issue) We request the record be given full consideration for the character of discharge. The applicant had undergone alcohol rehabilitation and has supplied the board with his statement. We refer this case to the Board for their careful and compassionate consideration and request the applicant's discharge be reviewed for Clemency due to post service.” 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. Therefore, relief is not warranted.
The applicant remains 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, effective 15 Aug 91 until
04 Mar 93), 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 | ND99-00587

    Original file (ND99-00587.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND99-00587 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 990324, requested that the characterization of service on the 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).In the applicant’s issues 1 and 2, the Board determined these issues are without merit. He clearly established a pattern of misconduct, in...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00790

    Original file (ND03-00790.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 Character/job reference, undated Twenty pages from Applicant’s service American Legion’s comments, dated April 13, 2004 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 900419 - 900918 COG Active: None Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 900919 Date of...

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00235

    Original file (MD02-00235.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION Charge III: violation of the UCMJ, Article 134: Incapacitated for the proper performance of his duties on 911128 in Subic Bay, Republic of the Philippines. The applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, reflects his willful disobedience of the orders and directives which regulate good order and discipline in the naval service, and falls short of that required for an honorable...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00092

    Original file (ND02-00092.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00092 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 011009, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. I am a good person and, aside from the Navy, have never been in any kind of trouble. The applicant can provide additional documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments at that time.

  • USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-01001

    Original file (MD01-01001.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD01-01001 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010727, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions. At the time of my problems in the Marines, I now consider myself to have been immature and have come to regret my actions. After a review of the Former Service Members (FSM) DD Form 293 Application for the Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the Armed Forces of the United States...

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-00098

    Original file (MD03-00098.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.950717: Summary Court-Martial: Charge I: violation of the UCMJ, Article 121 (4 specs): Specification 1: Larceny and wrongful appropriation of a check during the month of June 1994 aboard MCBH, HI. Charge II: violation of the UCMJ, Article 123 (2 specs): Specification 1: Forgery of a check on 940624 on the island of Oahu, HI. The Applicant was discharged upon his end of active...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00009

    Original file (ND01-00009.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 Seven 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) 891031 - 900430 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 900501 Date of Discharge: 920813 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 02 03 13 Inactive:...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00005

    Original file (ND01-00005.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    No indication of appeal in the record.850925: [USS SHENANDOAH (AD-44)] 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 5 non-judicial punishments in 23 months, and misconduct due to drug abuse as evidence by one drug incident in this enlistment.850926: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: UA less than 24 hours on 850901 and 850910, violation of UCMJ Article 91:...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01168

    Original file (ND03-01168.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-01168 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030624. Service members service record; Midway (CV-41), (NMCB-40), compared to PSD North Island, along with all medical records obtainable and VA medical records, statements of support (copies), service members statement and all other records pertaining to discharge upgrade.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00498

    Original file (ND01-00498.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) conducts a record review prior to any personal appearance hearing. No indication of appeal in the record.880321: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse as evidenced by one NJP for conviction for illegal use of marijuana and misconduct due to commission of a serious offense as evidenced by one conviction for violation of UCMJ Articles 92, 113, and...