Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00082
Original file (ND02-00082.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-MSSA, USN
Docket No. ND02-00082

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 011009, 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. Subsequent to the application for review the applicant obtained American Legion as his representative.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 020715. 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 3630615.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as submitted
1. (Equity Issue) This former member proffers that his UOTHC is too harsh in light of his overall service record.

2. (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, there was NO DISCHARGE PACKAGE AVAILABLE, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
Copies of DD Form 214 (4)
Letter from Applicant

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: USN               920611 - 960612  HON
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     None

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 961210               Date of Discharge: 971014

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 00 10 04
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 23                          Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 42

 Highest Rate: ABE3

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: NMA                  Behavior: NMA             OTA: NMA

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: GCA, MUC, NAVY"E"RIBBON, NDSM, SSDR(2), SASMwb*, NUC, AFSM, KLM, UNM

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: None noted (complete record not available)

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630615 [previously contained in Article 3630600].

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

961210:  Reenlisted at MEPS Atlanta, GA for 4 years.

NO DISCHARGE PACKAGE AVAILABLE

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 971014 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to minor disciplinary infractions (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 no indication the applicant was treated unfairly concerning his administrative separation. The applicant failed to provide sufficient documentation to rebut the presumption of regularity in governmental affairs. Relief denied.

Issue 2. Normally, to permit relief, an error or injustice must have existed during the period of enlistment in question. No such error or injustice is evident 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 14, effective
03 Oct 96 until 11 Dec 97, Article 3630615 (previously contained in Article 3630600), SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL BY REASON OF MINOR DISCIPLINARY INFRACTIONS.

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 | ND01-00357

    Original file (ND01-00357.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00357 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010126, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. I wish you would change my discharge so it will make me feel better about myself, and for future jobs. Relief is not warranted.The applicant takes issue with being processed for wrongful use of controlled substance without a “piss test.” The Board found this issue without merit.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00092

    Original file (ND03-00092.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-MSSR, USN Docket No. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION When I was discharged from the Navy.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00281

    Original file (ND02-00281.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00281 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 20020123, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. Documentation In addition to the service record, NO DISCHARGE PACKAGE AVAILABLE, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Copies of DD Form 214 (2) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 940121 -...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00075

    Original file (ND99-00075.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :970114: Medical evaluation at Recruit Evaluation Unit: Borderline personality disorder, EPTE.970117: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with an uncharacterized service by reason of defective enlistment and induction due to erroneous enlistment as evidenced by a personality disorder. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00062

    Original file (ND03-00062.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-00062 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20021010. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. ]910315: DD Form 214: Applicant discharged under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00596

    Original file (ND04-00596.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. At this time, the Applicant has not provided verifiable documentation of good character and conduct to mitigate his misconduct while on active duty. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-01077

    Original file (ND01-01077.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Decision A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 020328. 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. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 920131, in absentia, under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to commission of a...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00394

    Original file (ND03-00394.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Respectfully Request my discharge be changed and Reenlistment code be changed as well.” Documentation In addition to the service record, NO DISCHARGE PACKAGE AVAILABLE, 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) 920129 -...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00878

    Original file (ND01-00878.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00878 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010625, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. 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.

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00720

    Original file (ND99-00720.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND99-00720 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 990503, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. 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).Responding to the applicant’s issue, the Board found nothing in the records, nor did the applicant provide anything to indicate or to show...