Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00051
Original file (ND02-00051.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-SA, USN
Docket No. ND02-00051

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 011004, 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 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 - Pattern of Misconduct, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues (verbatim)

1. Dear Sir's I understand at what decision you will make. At what I done while I was in the navy, I new from the start at what I done was wrong, now I would like to do the right thing. Because of what happen on Sept 11, 2001 that hurt our Country. Because I have and OTH on my Record that would tell me that I can't sign back up to fight for what I believe in. I would like to have a second chance in this to Proof you that I do Love God and to Fight for our Freedom, Like I did in the desert shield/desert storm. Look at my record. And whatever your decision is. That would be what the Lord wants it to be. Thank you for your time.

 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: USNR (DEP)     890405 - 890428  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 890429               Date of Discharge: 920820

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 03 03 22
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 19                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 25/28

 Highest Rate: SN

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.65 (4)    Behavior: 3.50 (4)                OTA: 3.50

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM, SASM with 2 Stars, NUC, SSR, KLM, JMU

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: 33

 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 :

891030:  Applicant to unauthorized absence 0730, 30Oct89.

891101:  Applicant from unauthorized absence 2100, 1Nov89 (1 day/surrendered).

891101:  Applicant missed ship's movement.

891101:  Applicant unauthorized absence 0700-2100, 1Nov89.

 900802:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence from 0730, 5Jul90 to 2330, 17Jul90 (12 days/surrendered), violation of UCMJ, Article 87: Missing ship's movement on 5Jul90.
         Award: Forfeiture of $406 per month for 1 month, restriction and extra duty for 30 days. No indication of appeal in the record.
900802:  Retention Warning from USS SEATTLE (AOE-3): Advised of deficiency (Misconduct due to violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence from unit for 12 days and violation of UCMJ, Article 87: Missing ship's movement.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

910629:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence from 0730, 1Jun91 to 2130, 13Jun91 (12 days/surrendered), violation of UCMJ, Article 87: Miss ship's movement on 5Jun91.
         Award: Forfeiture of $422 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 30 days, reduction to SA. Reduction suspended for 6 months. No indication of appeal in the record.
920618:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86 (3 specs): (1) Unauthorized absence 0730-0743, 22May92, (2) Unauthorized absence 0700-0730, 1Jun92, (3) Unauthorized absence 0700-2318, 3Jun92.
         Award: Forfeiture of $500 per month for 1 month, extra duty for 14 days. Suspended for 6 months. No indication of appeal in the record.
920723:  Vacate suspended forfeiture awarded at CO's NJP dated 18Jun92 due to continued misconduct.
920723:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence from 0700, 13Jul92 to 0700, 21Jul92 (8 days/surrendered).
         Award: Forfeiture of $440 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to SA. No indication of appeal in the record.
920724:  USS SEATTLE (AOE-3) notified applicant of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense or civil conviction and misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct as evidenced by all service record entries. Extracted from Commanding Officer's message dated 28Jul92.
920724:          Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights. [Extracted from Commanding Officer's message dated 28Jul92.]
920728:  Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense or civil conviction and misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.

920807:  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 920820 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).

The applicant requested an upgrade in this discharge in wake of the events of Sept 11 th and would like a second chance. The Board carefully reviewed the applicant’s service record and noted that he was discharged after establishing a pattern of misconduct. The Board found no impropriety or inequity in the discharge. The Other Than Honorable discharge accurately describes the applicant’s service. Relief is denied.

 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 positive community service, employment history, and clean police record. Relief is not warranted.

The applicant is 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, 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 | 1999_Navy | ND99-01098

    Original file (ND99-01098.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    No indication of appeal in the record.920717: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence for 2 days, violation of UCMJ Article 92: Disobeying a lawful order. 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 applicant’s Commanding Officer was within his legal...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00487

    Original file (ND99-00487.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    No indication of appeal in the record.920708: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.920709: Applicant advised of his rights and having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to appear before an Administrative Discharge Board.920723: Applicant waived his right to an Administrative Discharge Board and representation at the board and to make a...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00499

    Original file (ND99-00499.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-SR, USNR Docket No. ND99-00499 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 990224, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. Accordingly, the reason for discharge shall change to Honorable/ Secretary Plenary Authority, MILPERSMAN 3630900.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00011

    Original file (ND01-00011.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION It doesn't get you nowhere.” The NDRB found this issue non decisional. Regret and remorse alone are no basis upon which the Board can grant relief.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00442

    Original file (ND00-00442.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-DCFR, USN Docket No. Applicant surrendered to military authorities on 1113, 900705 onboard USS FAIRFAX COUNTY at Little Creek, VA. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 910329 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (A).

  • 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 | ND99-01239

    Original file (ND99-01239.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    830820: Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (Unauthorized absence from NTC, Great Lakes, IL commencing on/or about 0545, 820913 and termination on/or about 0830, 820922 and Unauthorized absence from USS CHARLESTON (LKA-113), located at Norfolk, VA commencing on/or about 830307 and termination on/or about 830423), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning. After a thorough review of the records,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00982

    Original file (ND02-00982.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered: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 :Date of Enlistment: 870114 Date of Discharge: 881208 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 01 02 25 Inactive: 00 07 29 The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00305

    Original file (ND01-00305.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    No indication of appeal in the record.990917: Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (Unauthorized absence, failing to go to appointed place of duty and breaking restriction which was subsequently violated when he was awarded punishment at CO's NJP on 28Oct99 for failing to go to appointed place of duty. There is nothing in the applicant’s service record or application that shows the applicant was not responsible for his documented misconduct while on active duty. The names, and votes of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00849

    Original file (ND99-00849.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    No indication of appeal in the record.930202: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 134: Drinking on restriction on 1Feb93. No indication of appeal in the record.930202: USS WICHITA (AOR-11) 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 NJP's of 23Oc91, 13Nov91, 11Sep92, 28Dec92 and 2Feb93 and misconduct due to commission of a serious offense as evidenced by wrongful use...