Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00847
Original file (ND01-00847.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-AR, USN
Docket No. ND01-00847

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 010612, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable or entry level separation or uncharacterized and the reason for the discharge be changed to (left blank). The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. The applicant listed the VA Center in Oklahoma City as the representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 020417. 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: GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-140 (formerly 3630600).

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

1. My name is (applicant), (social security number deleted). I was release from active duty from the U.S. Navy May 23,2000. The characteristics of my discharged were due to a pattern of misconduct. I am writing you on this day May 07,2001 to ask for a Review in my discharge, which was GENERAL UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS with a RE-CODE 4.

My pattern of misconduct was based on incidents that I realize now were petty and immature and I should have walked away from. This last year I have gotten to know exactly what I want out of life. I have enrolled in college and I am majoring in Paralegal studies. I have not had any problems within or outside the community. I have been going to church more, and watching myself around people that don't want to do the right thing. These are things that I didn't do in the Navy. If I were to have an upgrade in my discharge, I would enlist in the National Guard. The reason why I want to enlist in the Guard is because when I was in the Navy I didn't make it work. That is because my priorities were wrong and I was more concerned with having fun and doing my own thing more than what was going to happen in my future. I would like another chance to show that I have matured and I can take responsibility for my own actions.

The need to change has come from myself and my fiancé and the life we want with each. He has been with me from the very beginning. I didn't realize then but being with him has also made my future clear to me and the conclusion of it is that I needed to make changes within my life. The decisions I make no longer just affects me they also affects my future husband. You don't realize that the actions you do that day, will affect someone you really care for the next day. So that's why I want to get my life in order. And I think that the first step of making it is accepting responsibility for what I have done and asking for another chance to prove myself.

With this I am asking for an upgrade in my discharge, Re-Code and the characteristics of my discharge to be reviewed and changed to one that would allow me to reenlist. Thank you Sincerely,

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)     971016 - 971027  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 971028               Date of Discharge: 000523

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 02 06 26
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 19                          Years Contracted: 8

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 45

 Highest Rate: AA

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.00 (2)    Behavior: 2.00 (2)                OTA: 2.84

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: HSM

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

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

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

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

980817:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Disobey order (alcohol beverages in barracks.
         Award: Correctional custody for 15 days. No indication of appeal in the record. [Extracted from report and disposition of offenses dated March 28, 2000]
981209:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 91: Disrespect to a petty officer.
         Award: Correctional custody for 14 days, reduction to AR. No indication of appeal in the record.
981209:  Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (Violated UCMJ, Article 91.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

000331:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 128: Assault on 13Feb00, to wit: unlawfully strike AN in the face with a closed fist, violation of UCMJ, Article 134: Disorderly conduct, drunkenness on 13Feb00.
         Award: Forfeiture of $150 per month for 2 months, extra duty for 45 days, reduction to AR. No indication of appeal in the record.
000505:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge general (under honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.
000505:  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.

000505:  Commanding officer directed the applicant's discharge general (under 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 000523 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’s discharge characterization accurately reflects her service to her 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. Evidence of continuing educational pursuits, an employment record, documentation of community service, certification of non-involvement with civil authorities and proof of her not using drugs, are examples of verifiable documents that should have been provided to receive consideration for relief, based on post-service conduct. The applicant did not provide sufficient documentation to warrant an upgrade to her discharge. She is reminded that she remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of her 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.

The NDRB has no authority to change reenlistment codes or make recommendations to permit reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Naval Service or any other branch of the Armed Forces. Neither a less than fully honorable discharge nor an unfavorable “RE” code is, in itself, a bar to reenlistment. A request for waiver is normally done only during the processing of a formal application for enlistment through a recruiter. Relief is therefore denied.

 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 | 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00804

    Original file (ND02-00804.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00804 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020515, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. So finally a week later my mother called me and told me that she just got back home from the hospital with my grandmother. After I was assigned my punishments 90 days restrictions, check-in three times a day, a 1-half of my pay I was separated from the Navy.Since I was out of the military services.

  • 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00110

    Original file (ND01-00110.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00110 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 001031, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable or entry level separation or uncharacterized and the reason for the discharge be changed to convenience of the government. 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 applicant’s...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00119

    Original file (ND00-00119.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00119 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 991102, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. It has been many years since my discharge. 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).In issue 1, the applicant states that his “discharge was based on many offenses, but they were...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00851

    Original file (ND00-00851.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The next day I was sent to a Court Martial, which resulted in 30 days in brig and $600 x 2 for the ammo and did not discharge me at that time. The next day I was sent to a Court Martial, which resulted in 30 days in brig and $600 x 2 for the ammo and did not discharge me at that time. I want a personal hearing on this matter.” The NDRB found no impropriety or inequity in the applicant’s discharge.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00327

    Original file (ND01-00327.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I would like to, "THANK", the board for its time in reviewing my discharge. Members of the Board, please change my discharge to a General discharge. 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.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00422

    Original file (ND01-00422.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    As a result of not finishing the program, I was not made an E3 as promised.2. 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: “I spoke with a Navy Recruiter in 1986 and was told that if I successfully completed the ROTC program through McClellan High School that I would be promoted to E3 upon completion of boot camp. Relief is...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00166

    Original file (ND03-00166.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-00166 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 20021107, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The Applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. I know that my records will be reviewed carefully to determine whether my request will be granted or denied.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00562

    Original file (ND03-00562.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of 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, also advised that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) does not travel, all hearing are held in the Washington National Capital Region. Verifiable proof of any post-service accomplishments...