Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00961
Original file (ND01-00961.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-ABFAR, USN
Docket No. ND01-00961

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 010718, 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.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 020130. 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

 See Letter from Applicant below.

Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
Letter from Applicant (2pgs)
Copy of DD Form 214

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: USN                        None
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     890913 - 891212  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 891213               Date of Discharge: 920720

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 02 07 08
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 18                          Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 35

 Highest Rate: ABFAN

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.10 (2)    Behavior: 2.90 (2)                OTA: 3.00

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: SASMw2b*, NUC, Navy"E"Ribbon, NDSM, SSDR, KLM

 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 :

911024:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: UA from unit from 0700 to 0850, 911018, violation of UCMJ Article 92: Wrongfully violate Tijuana Curfew on 911012.
Award: Restriction and extra duty for 15 days. No indication of appeal in the record.
911024:  Retention Warning from [USS RANGER (CV-60)]: Advised of deficiency (Article 86, UCMJ -UA from unit 0700, 911018 to 0850, 911018; Article 92, UCMJ -violated a lawful general regulation on or about 0519, 911015), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

920220:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 128: Assault by striking on 920205, violation of UCMJ Article 134: Drunk and disorderly on 920205.
         Award: Forfeiture of $250.00 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 30 days, reduction to E-2 (suspended for 3 months). No indication of appeal in the record.

920430:  Punishment of RIR to ABFAA suspended at CO's NJP of 920220 vacated due to continued misconduct.

920430:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Failed to go to appointed place of duty on 920421, violation of UCMJ Article 112: Drunk on duty on 920421.
Award: Restriction and extra duty for 30 days. No indication of appeal in the record.
920615:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: UA from unit from 2130, 920604 to 0445, 920605, violation of UCMJ Article 91: (2 Specifications), Disobey a lawful order of PO1 on 920604, Disobeyed a lawful order of CPO on 920604, violation of UCMJ Article 92: Failed to obey a lawful order on 920604.
Award: Forfeiture of $300.00 per month for 2 months, restriction for 60 days, reduction to E-1. No indication of appeal in the record.
920621:  Medical Evaluation states applicant appears to demonstrate a pattern of irresponsible and uncontrolled drinking behavior. Members multiple alcohol related incidents, and continued abuses despite his problems in one of multiple indicators of early alcohol dependence. Member is in dire need of treatment for his conditions. Member is recommended for Level III Treatment.

920615:  [USS RANGER] 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 three or more UCMJ punishments during current enlistment, and misconduct due to commission of a serious offense as evidenced by the Article 91 (2 Specifications), 92 (2 Specifications), 112, and 128, UCMJ, offenses committed during current enlistment.
920618:          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, to submit a written statement in his own behalf. To 2 working days to respond to the notice of administrative board procedure proposed action.

920622:  Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and commission of a serious offense.

920702:  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 920720 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. A characterization of service of other than honorable conditions is warranted when significant negative aspects of a member's conduct or performance of duty outweigh the positive aspects of the member's military record. T he applicant’s service was marred by award of nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for offenses triable by court-martial on four occasions and an adverse counseling entry on another occasion. 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 naval service, and falls short of that required for an honorable characterization of service. An upgrade would be inappropriate. 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. Evidence of continuing educational pursuits, an employment record, documentation of community service, certification of non-involvement with civil authorities and proof of his 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 his discharge. He is reminded that he remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of his 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.


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 | 2003_Navy | ND03-00677

    Original file (ND03-00677.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions and the reason for the discharge be changed. Not appealed.920213: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.920218: Applicant advised of his rights and having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to appear...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00683

    Original file (ND02-00683.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00683 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020415, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable and the reason for the discharge be changed to Secretarial Authority. Documentation Only the Applicant's service and medical records were reviewed, the Applicant did not provide additional documentation for the Board to consider. ]920430: CO, USS BOWEN notified Applicant of intended recommendation for discharge under...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00993

    Original file (ND99-00993.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 and that this Board does not travel. is reminded that he is eligible for a personal appearance hearing provided the application is received within 15 years from the date of discharge. You may obtain a copy of DoD Directive 1332.28 by writing to: DA Military Review Boards Agency Management Information and...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01304

    Original file (ND03-01304.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :890626: Applicant to active duty for 48 months under the TAR Enlistment Program.900517: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86 (2 specs): (1) Unauthorized absence on 0515, 900424 to 0540, 900425 (1 day), (2) Unauthorized absence from 0500, 900503 to 1419, 900505 (2 days). No indication of appeal in the...

  • 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00465

    Original file (ND04-00465.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. “Mitigating Circumstances At this time I am requesting a review of my discharge. _______________________________________________________________________ In accordance with 32 C.F.R., section 724.166, and SECNAVINST 5420.174C, enclosure (1), paragraph 1.16, The American Legion submits to the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB or Board) the above issue and following statement in...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00858

    Original file (ND04-00858.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION 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) 900810 - 901114 COG Active: None Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 901115 Date of Discharge: 920713 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 01 07 09 (Accounts for lost...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00640

    Original file (ND99-00640.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    My discharge was improper because it was based on 8 days of time lost during my 3 years 1 month 21 days of service with no other adverse action. 841015: Surrendered on board at 0715 (3 days). No indication of appeal in the record.841101: Retention Warning from USS CANOPUS: Advised of deficiency (violation of UCMJ Article 92 - disobeying a lawful order, disrespect to a petty officer and failure to obey order/regulation), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00051

    Original file (ND00-00051.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. P: Level II treatment recommended.911125: Medical: Applicant reinterviewed and still concluded applicant is abusive of ETOH not dependent at this time. 920807: Commanding officer recommended discharge under Other Than Honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a Pattern of Misconduct,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-01004

    Original file (ND99-01004.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The discharge shall remain: UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/Misconduct - Pattern of misconduct, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.The NDRB did note an administrative error on the original DD Form 214. 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. The NDRB reviews the...