Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-01019
Original file (ND01-01019.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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


ex-DCFA, USN
Docket No. ND01-01019

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 010731, 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 020221. 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 – commission of a serious offense, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION


Issues

 1. My request is based on facts that I would beg you to consider.
 At age 18, I entered the United States Navy at my mother and Stepfathers insistence. I had lost my biological father 4 days before I was to turn 18 and was what my mother called me out of control. They thought as most parents back then though, that it would help me and straighten me out. Instead I resented them form letting me join and not having time to grieve for my father or think things our. Service life just wasn't for me then. I just wish I would have realized sooner that it was what I needed. I am 30 years of age with a wife and 2 children and am trying very hard to better myself and to support and take care of my family as best I can. I would appreciate it if you would consider my request for a change in my present discharge to general/under honorable conditions. I truly regret any problems that I caused the Navy. Now that I am older and know now that my mother only did what she thought was best for me. Again I beg you to please reconsider my present discharge to general/ under honorable conditions.

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: USN                        None
          Inactive: USNR (DEP)     890225 - 890821  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 890822               Date of Discharge: 910226

 Length of Service (years, months, days):
         Active: 01 06 05
          Inactive: None
Age at Entry: 18                          Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 55

 Highest Rate: DCFA
Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.40 (1)    Behavior: 3.00 (1)                OTA : 3.20
Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: None

Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/Misconduct – commission of a serious offense, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

890825:  DAAR indicates marijuana abuse as a result of a service directed urinalysis, dependency not determines, recommended for Level I Treatment.
891219:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92: (2 Specifications), failure to obey lawful regulation; Spec 1: Wrongfully consumed alcohol underage, Spec 2: Wrongfully disobeying the integrated training battalion regulations by possessing and being in civilian clothes.
         Award: Forfeiture of $349.00 per month for 2 month(s), restriction and extra duty for 45 days. No indication of appeal in the record.
891219:  Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (Violation of the UCMJ, Article 92 (2 Specifications, failure to obey order or regulation), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.
        
910118:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Failure to obey order or regulation, violation of UCMJ Article 134: False or unauthorized pass offenses.
         Award: Oral admonition, forfeiture of $150.00 per month for 1 month, restriction and extra duty for 30 days, reduction to next inferior pay grade (suspended for 6 months). No indication of appeal in the record.
910128:  Commanding Officer, Transient Personnel Unit, Charleston, SC approved DAPA, Naval Station, Charleston, SC request to drop applicant from Rehabilitation Program, due to applicant's self-disenrollment (refusal to continue) from Level III Alcohol Rehabilitation Program.
910130:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of alcohol abuse rehabilitation failure and misconduct due to the commission of serious offenses - failure to obey general order or regulation and false or unauthorized pass offenses.
910131:  DAAR indicates alcohol abuse, identified by Military Police. Medical Officer's evaluation found applicant dependent, recommended separation not VIA VA Hospital.
910131:          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.
910131:  Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of alcohol abuse rehabilitation failure and misconduct due to the commission of serious offenses - failure to obey general order or regulation and false or unauthorized pass offenses.

910219:  CNMPC directed the applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 910226 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (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 Board found that the applicant’s age, education level, and test scores qualified him for enlistment. While he may feel that his youth and family problems were factors that contributed to his actions, the record clearly reflects his willful disregard for the requirements of military discipline and demonstrated that he was unfit for further service. The record is devoid of evidence that the applicant was not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions. 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 15560A), Change 8, effective
21 Aug 89 until 14 Aug 91, Article 3630600, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT – COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE.

 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 | ND03-00836

    Original file (ND03-00836.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/ under honorable conditions. Member has low potential for further naval service.900116: Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense. For the Applicant’s information, he may petition the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) for a change to his records if he believes that...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00019

    Original file (ND04-00019.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review. Concerning reenlistment, the NDRB has no authority to change reenlistment codes or make recommendations to permit reentry into the naval service or any other of the Armed Forces.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00917

    Original file (ND03-00917.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Decision A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20040401. The Applicant has not submitted any documentation to mitigate his misconduct while on active duty.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00329

    Original file (ND02-00329.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The discharge shall remain: UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/Misconduct - Pattern of misconduct, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600. After a complete review of the entire record, including the evidence submitted by the Applicant, the board determined that his discharge was appropriate and that his evidence of post-service conduct was found not to mitigate the conduct for which he was discharged. The Applicant can provide additional documentation to support any claims of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00228

    Original file (ND03-00228.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    891110: CNMPC directed the Applicant's discharge under honorable conditions (general) by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense. The Applicant requests the Board to consider his post-service conduct in assessing the merits of his application for discharge upgrade.The Board considered the post-service documentation provided and recognizes the character reference letters, and certificate he earned. The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00527

    Original file (ND01-00527.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-DCFA, USN Docket No. ND01-00527 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010315, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable and his re-enlistment code upgraded from an Re-Code-4 to a re-enlistment codes so he may re-enlist. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00870

    Original file (ND02-00870.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The discharge shall remain: UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/Misconduct – commission of a serious offense, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Three pages from service record Applicant's DD Form 214 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: None Active: None Period of Service Under Review...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00735

    Original file (ND01-00735.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Please allow me to upgrade my discharge like I've stated I've regretted my decision for 8 years. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copies of DD Form 214 (2). 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00012

    Original file (ND00-00012.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-MSSA, USN Docket No. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 910226 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (A). 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01365

    Original file (ND03-01365.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The discharge shall remain: UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL)/Misconduct – commission of a serious offense, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600. 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...