Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-01171
Original file (ND01-01171.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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


ex-AA, USN
Docket No. ND01-01171

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 010917, 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 listed American Legion as the representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 020517. 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, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION


Issues

 1. (Equity Issue) This former member further requests that the board include provision of SECNAVINST 5420.174C, 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:
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)     940624 - 940912  COG
Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 940913               Date of Discharge: 960802

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 01 10 20
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 18                          Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 32
Highest Rate: AN

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):
Performance: 2.00 (1)    Behavior: 2.00 (1)                OTA: 2.00

 Military Decorations: None
Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM, SASM(wb*), SSDR

Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.
Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

960109:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: On or about 951209, without authority, go from his duty section with intent to abandon the same.
         Award: Restriction for 50 days (20 days suspended for 6 months). No indication of appeal in the record.
960619:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 112a: Wrongful use of marijuana.
         Award: Forfeiture of $490.00 pay per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to E-2. No indication of appeal in the record.
960624:  Medical evaluation found applicant not dependent on drugs or alcohol.

 960627:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse and commission of a serious offense evidenced by punishments under the UCMJ during current enlistment.
960627:          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.
960708:  Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse and commission of a serious offense.

960722:  BUPERS 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 960802 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 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), Change 9, effective
22 Jul 94 until 02 Oct 96, 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 | 2001_Navy | ND01-00417

    Original file (ND01-00417.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Letter from applicant dated August 30, 2000 (Attachment A) Letter from applicant dated August 30, 2000 (Attachment B) Character reference Copy of DD Form 214 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: USNR (DEP) 930728 - 931205 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 931206...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00251

    Original file (ND03-00251.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The applicant provided no documentation of his post-service for the Board to consider. You may view DoD Directive 1332.28 and other Decisional Documents by going online at " afls14.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:

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00333

    Original file (ND02-00333.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00333 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020128, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable and the reason for the discharge be changed to Honorable. I was separated from the US Navy "with a other than honorable" discharge (4) four years ago. No indication of appeal in the record.960531: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00385

    Original file (ND01-00385.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The discharge shall change to: HONORABLE/Misconduct, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.A personal appearance discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on XXXXXX. (Equity Issue) This former member opines that her post-service conduct has been sufficiently creditable to warrant the Board’s clemency relief as authorized under provisions of SECNAVINST 5420.174C, enclosure (1), paragraph 9.3. Recommend SNM be separated with characterization of service as other than...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00351

    Original file (ND03-00351.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged on 19940307 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (A). Issue 1: After a review of the Applicant’s service record, in conjunction with consideration of the factors listed in paragraph...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00974

    Original file (ND99-00974.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND99-00974 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 990713, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00150

    Original file (ND00-00150.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant declined treatment.960723: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under Other Than Honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the Commission of a serious offense as evidence by violation of UCMJ, Article 111 (Drunken driving) and Alcohol abuse rehabilitation failure, when he refused to participate in Level II Alcohol treatment.960723: Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ, Article 27B,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00777

    Original file (ND02-00777.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:None. 960503: BUPERS directed the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense. The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of discharge.

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00437

    Original file (ND99-00437.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    960816: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge general (under honorable conditions) by reason of convenience of the government on the basis of a diagnosed personality disorder of such severity as to render the applicant incapable of serving adequately in the naval service, misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct based on two NJP's in your current enlistment and misconduct due to commission of a serious offense by violation of UCMJ Articles 92 and 91.960816: Applicant...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00259

    Original file (ND02-00259.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).The Applicant contends his discharge was inequitable because it was based on one incident in 9 years, 11 months and a number of days of active duty service with no other adverse action. The Naval Discharge Review Board is only authorized to examine the enlistment during which the discharge was awarded. However, the...