Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00118
Original file (ND02-00118.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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


ex-STGSN, USN
Docket No. ND02-00118

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 011019, 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 020701. 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 HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL)/Misconduct - Pattern of misconduct, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as submitted

1. To whom it concerns,
 I have been a good citizen since my discharge (No Felony cases (I didn't have &/or been accused of any felony charges &/or cases.))
I'm a registered voter & vote at all elections. I take care of my sons (1 yr with me, the other with their mother), I'm still an Electronic Technician (add Fiber Optic, Mechanical, Thematic (spelled wrong) and UV Technician.
My reasons for getting out were because of Family Reasons and though I got in trouble it wasn't that I was bad it's just the Navy and I just were not meant to be together.
Thank you for your time and consideration,

 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)     851219 - 860127  COG
Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 860128               Date of Discharge: 880810

 Length of Service (years, months, days):
         Active: 02 06 13
          Inactive: None
Age at Entry: 21                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 54
Highest Rate: STG3

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):
Performance: 3.00 (2)    Behavior: 3.00 (2)                OTA: 3.20

 Military Decorations: None
Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: SSDR

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: 11
Character, Narrative Reason, and Authority of Discharge (at time of issuance):

UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL)/Misconduct - Pattern of misconduct, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

861010:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Absence from unit on 0900, 20Sep86 until 0713, 22Sep86 (1 day).
         Award: Forfeiture of $50 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 10 days. No indication of appeal in the record.
870515:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 111: Drunken or reckless driving on 18Apr87.
         Award: Restriction and extra duty for 30 days, reduction to STGSN. Reduction suspended for 6 months. No indication of appeal in the record.
870515:  Retention Warning from USS MEYERKORD (FF 1058): Advised of deficiency (Drunken or reckless driving.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.
880501:  Applicant to unauthorized absence.

 880502:  Applicant missed ship's movement.

880511:  Applicant apprehended by civil authorities 1020, 11May88 and delivered to USS MEYERKORD (FF 1058), 1207, 11May88 (10 days/apprehended).

 880513:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86 (4 specs): Absence from unit, violation of UCMJ, Article 87: Missing ship's movement. Offense dates 1Apr88, 3Apr88, 15Apr88, 1May88 and 2May88.
         Award: Forfeiture of $438 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 30 days, reduction to STGSN. Reduction suspended for 6 months. No indication of appeal in the record.

880705:  USS MEYERKORD (FF 1058) notified applicant of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense and misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.
880706:  Applicant advised of rights and having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to appear before an Administrative Discharge Board.
880708:  An Administrative Discharge Board, based upon a preponderance of the evidence and by unanimous vote, found that the applicant had committed misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and misconduct due to a commission of a serious offense, that the misconduct warranted separation, and recommended discharge under honorable conditions (general).

880810:  Commanding Officer directed discharge under honorable conditions (general) 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 880810 under honorable conditions (general) 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. 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. While he may feel that his family problem was a factor 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. 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, effective 870615 - 890110), Article 3630600, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED MEMBERS 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 | ND99-00374

    Original file (ND99-00374.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-SA, USNR Docket No. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 11 pages from applicant’s service record (previously held by NDRB) Ltr from Congressman Wicker’s office with enclosed DD214 ICO applicant Ltr from applicant requesting case review Ltr from A. You may obtain a copy of DoD...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00226

    Original file (ND03-00226.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-00226 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 021121, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. No indication of appeal in the record.921215: USS KIRK (FF-1087) notified Applicant of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and commission of a serious offense.930122: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: UA on 930111. ...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-01022

    Original file (ND00-01022.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) also advised that the board first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing. 901015: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: UA from USS KITTY HAWK, from 0700-0830, 901007, violation of UCMJ Article 92: Derelict in the performance of duty on or about 901007 by failing to clean work center space in a timely manner. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on...

  • 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 | 2002_Navy | ND02-01264

    Original file (ND02-01264.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    No indication of appeal in the record.930302: USS GOLDSBOROUGH (DDG 20) 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 seven specifications of unauthorized absence, dereliction in the performance of duties, and larceny; and misconduct due to commission of a serious offense as evidenced by dereliction in the performance of duties and larceny.930303: Applicant advised of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00647

    Original file (ND01-00647.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00647 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010416, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. 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) 911024 - 920322 COG Period of Service Under Review...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00550

    Original file (ND02-00550.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I have worked in the same field since leaving the Navy and I'm responsible for my actions.I'm asking to have my discharge upgraded because I was so young and made mistakes but my hope is to not have this held against me my whole life. No indication of appeal in the record.910520: USS PUGET SOUND (AD 38) notified Applicant of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and alcohol abuse rehabilitation...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00760

    Original file (ND01-00760.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    901205: Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and drug abuse. 901210: CNMPC directed the applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. 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’s...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00196

    Original file (ND02-00196.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00196 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020102, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The Applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00754

    Original file (ND00-00754.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION No indication of appeal in the record.861007: USS CAPODANNO (FF 1093) notified applicant of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of frequent involvement of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities.861007: Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights except...