Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00898
Original file (ND01-00898.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-SR, USN
Docket No. ND01-00898

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 010703, 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 020110. 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 3630600.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issue (verbatim)

1. As previous application I believe my discharge was misunderstanding by superiors due to colleagues and was unfair and misunderstanding to myself and I request Honorable, was never seen any paperwork for pattern of misconduct, until discharged, discharge copy only.

Please see supporting documents.

 Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
Copy of DD Form 214
Letter of Commendation, undated (2 copies)
Letter re: Junior Sailor of the Quarter dated May 6, 1993 (2 copies)
Letter from Commanding Officer dated June 1, 1994 (2 copies)
Letter from Board for Correction of Naval Records
Copy of DD Form 149

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: None
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     920110 - 920817  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 920818               Date of Discharge: 950815

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 02 11 28
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 19                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 35

 Highest Rate: SN

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.13 (3)    Behavior: 3.13 (3)                OTA: 3.47

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM, SASM w/Bronze Star, AFEM, SSDR

 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 3630600.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

940604:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Absent without leave.
         Award: Extra duty for 14 days. No indication of appeal in the record.
940604:  7 days charged as leave.

 941123:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Absence without leave, violation of UCMJ, Article 92 (2 specs): (1) Failure to obey order or regulation, (2) Dereliction of duty, violation of UCMJ, Article 112: Drunk on duty.
         Award: Forfeiture of $500 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to SA. No indication of appeal in the record.
941123:  Retention Warning from USS OGDEN: Advised of deficiency (Absence without leave, failure to obey order or regulation, dereliction of duty, and drunk on duty.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning. [Extracted from CO's message dated 11Jul95.]

950201:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Absence without leave.
         Award: Forfeiture of $300 per month for 1 month, extra duty for 15 days. No indication of appeal in the record.
950627:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Absence without leave.
         Award: Forfeiture of $300 per month for 1 month, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to SR. No indication of appeal in the record.
950629:  USS OGDEN 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 number of Commanding Officer's nonjudicial punishments. [Extracted from CO's message dated 11Jul95.]
950629:          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. [Extracted from CO's message dated 11Jul95.]
950711:  Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.

950807:  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 950815 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 states, verbatim: “As previous application I believe my discharge was misunderstanding by superiors due to colleagues and was unfair and misunderstanding to myself and I request Honorable, was never seen any paperwork for pattern of misconduct, until discharged, discharge copy only.” The records show that the applicant was given opportunities to correct his behavior and he failed to comply with counseling. Further, the record shows the applicant was afforded his due process throughout the discharge proceedings. He was properly notified by his Commanding Officer that he was recommended for discharge under Other Than Honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. The discharge was proper and equitable. 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 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, Change 9, effective
22 Jul 94 until 02 Oct 96), 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 | ND99-00644

    Original file (ND99-00644.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    It has been almost 4 years and I have had no response from the Review Board. CA 960202: Vacation of suspension ordered approved and executed.960305: CO, Naval Hospital, Twentynine Palms, CA notified applicant of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.960305: Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights except the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00773

    Original file (ND01-00773.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00773 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010515, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The discharge shall remain: GENERAL UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS/PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-140 (formerly 3630600). The applicant’s second issue states: “(American Legion's Equity Issue) This former member further requests that the Board include provision of SECNAVINST 5420.174C,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00732

    Original file (ND04-00732.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    No indication of appeal in the record.940816: NAVDRUGLAB, San Diego, CA, reported Applicant’s urine sample, received 940810, tested positive for amphetamine/methamphetamine.940819: Medical Evaluation: Applicant not drug dependent, recommend Level II CAAC treatment if retained in the service.940822: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 112A (2 specs): (1) Wrongfully possess an amount of amphetamine/methamphetamine on 940808, (2) Wrongfully use amphetamines/methamphetamines. 941005: An...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-01172

    Original file (ND02-01172.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    (Equity Issue) This former member requests that the Board include provision of SECNAVINST 5420.175C,, enclosure (1), Chapter 9, as it pertains to post-service conduct, in assessing the merits of this application.” Documentation In addition to the service record, 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): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 19891205 –...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00407

    Original file (ND99-00407.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    (EQUITY ISSUE) This former member further requests that the Board include provisions of SECNAVINST 5420.174C., enclosure (1), Chapter 9, as it pertains to post-service conduct, in assessing the merits of her application. 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 issue 1, the Board determined this issue is without merit. During the list...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00495

    Original file (ND01-00495.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, 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: None Inactive: None Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 921123 Date of Discharge: 940628 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 01 07 06 Inactive: None I would be very grateful, if the board would change my discharge status to...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00948

    Original file (ND00-00948.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In the acknowledgement letter to the applicant, the applicant was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing. My name is (applicant). To long days of alcohol and depression.

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00616

    Original file (ND99-00616.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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).Regarding the applicant’s first five issues, it is the Board’s responsibility to review the applicant’s entire service record. In the applicant’s sixth issue, he asks the Board to consider his post-service conduct in assessing the merits of his application. At this time the applicant has not provided sufficient...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00909

    Original file (ND99-00909.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I would like the board to review my documents to request a change in discharge. The applicant request’s the Board review his documents and change his discharge. On 6 August 1996, the Commander, Naval Training Center, Great Lakes directed the applicant be discharged with an Other Than Honorable for Pattern of misconduct, which is also reflected on the applicant’s form DD-214.

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00709

    Original file (ND99-00709.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. Unauthorized absence since 900804.901015: Applicant surrendered from unauthorized absence 1135, 901015.901214: Summary Court Martial Charge I: violation of the UCMJ, Article 86. You may obtain a copy of DoD Directive 1332.28 by writing to: DA Military Review Boards Agency Management Information and Support...