Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00311
Original file (ND02-00311.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-AA, USN
Docket No. ND02-00311

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 020129, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to entry level separation or uncharacterized. 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 021121. 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 1910 - 142 (formerly 3630605).

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as submitted

 1. Hello Members of The Board,

My name is (Applicant), I want to re-enter the Navy that is the reason that I need my discharge changed. I have made some bad mistakes in my life, but getting a discharge under Other Than Honorable is one that I regret every day. I did some very irresponsible things and made some bad decisions while I was in the Navy but I have grown up a lot since then. If I should get another chance to re-enter the Navy I will not make the same mistakes, I will do good. My plans are to re-enter as a Seabee, my Rate would be (BU) Builder. I have some experience working in construction and I am very interested in learning more about this kind of work. The Seabee uniform is one that I would like to wear with pride every day. Please upgrade my discharge so I can serve my country with pride.

Thank You for your time.
Sincerely,

Applicant marked the box "I HAVE LISTED ADDITIONAL ISSUES AS AN ATTACHMENT TO THIS APPLICATION." None were found.

 Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Applicant's DD Form 214
U. S. Navy Seabee Rates

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     991027 - 991114  COG
         Active: None

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 991115               Date of Discharge: 001016

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 00 11 02
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 19                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 32

 Highest Rate: AA

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: NMF                  Behavior: NMF             OTA: NMF

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, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-142 (formerly 3630605).

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

000525:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence 000417.
         Award: Extra duty for 30 days. Extra duty for 15 days suspended. No indication of appeal in the record. [Extracted from Administrative Remarks dated 000525.]

000525:  Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (Unauthorized absence 000417.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.
        
000826:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Absence without leave.
         Award: Restriction for 15 days, extra duty for 30 days. No indication of appeal in the record.

000920:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86 (2 specs): Absence without leave, violation of UCMJ, Article 92 (4 specs): Failure to obey order or regulation, violation of UCMJ, Article 134 (2 specs): Drunkenness - incapacitation for performance of duties through prior wrongful indulgence in intoxicating liquor or any drug.
         Award: None. Recommended for OTH Administrative Separation. No indication of appeal in the record.

001016:  DD Form 214: Applicant discharged under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-142.

Note: The Applicant’s separation package is missing from the service record. The
NDRB requested the Applicant provide pertinent documentation to the Board for
review, if available. The NDRB received no response from Applicant to this request.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 001016 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 NDRB has no authority to change reenlistment codes or make recommendations to permit reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Naval Service or any other branch of the Armed Forces. Therefore, relief is denied.

Issue 2: The Applicant requested his discharge be changed to an Uncharacterized or Entry Level Separation (ELS). By regulation, members discharged within the first 180 days of enlistment are given an Uncharacterized or Entry Level Separation. The Applicant’s active duty service totals 11 months and 2 days. Therefore, he is not eligible for an ELS characterization of service. Relief denied.

 Issue 3: The Applicant was awarded non-judicial punishment (NJP) on three occasions. Although the Applicant regrets his misconduct, 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. The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, reflects his disregard for the orders and directives that regulate good order and discipline in the naval service. The discharge was proper and equitable. Relief denied.

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 up-graded based solely on the passage of time, or good conduct in civilian life subsequent to leaving the service.

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. The Applicant can provide additional documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments at that time. Representation at a personal appearance hearing is recommended but not required.




Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

 A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 30, dated 7 Nov 00, effective 30 Aug 00 until 24 Jan 01, Article 1910-142 [formerly 3630605]. SEPARATION 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 " 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:

                  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 | ND99-01009

    Original file (ND99-01009.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    To Whom It May Concern, My name is (applicant), I was discharged from the Navy on a under other than honorable discharge. My reason for the way I performed was because I was going through alot of personal problems back at home and I wanted out to try and correct them also I felt that the division I was working for at my command wasn't right. The applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, to discuss his post-service accomplishments, provided an application is received by...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00954

    Original file (ND99-00954.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 980602 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (A). The applicant’s first issue states “My undesirable discharge was inequitable because I came forth with the problem to seek help with the military and to try to stay in the military.” The NDRB found no evidence in the applicant’s service record to support this issue. You should read...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00028

    Original file (ND01-00028.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    It is, therefore, recommended that Seaman Apprentice (applicant) be separated administratively from the Naval Service under General (Under Honorable conditions). 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 issues state: “I have been a good citizen since discharge.” and “I have been working and saving money to go to college.” The applicant...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00887

    Original file (ND01-00887.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00887 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010626, 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:Copy of DD Form 214. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00322

    Original file (ND00-00322.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00322 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000112, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. In the acknowledgement letter to the applicant, the applicant was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01429

    Original file (ND03-01429.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-01429 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030903. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. ), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.020405: Charge Sheet: Violation of the UCMJ, Article 120: Rape Seaman Recruit on 011123.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00151

    Original file (ND00-00151.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 980824 under Other Than Honorable conditions for misconduct due to Commission of a serious offense (A and B). The applicant was not identified as a drug abuser, while serving in the Navy, therefore, the Navy is not responsible for providing rehabilitation treatment. PART IV - INFORMATION FOR THE APPLICANT If you believe that the decision in your case is unclear, not responsive to the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00765

    Original file (ND99-00765.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Decision A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 000417. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 980206 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (A). 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).Regarding the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00803

    Original file (ND02-00803.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00803 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020513, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions. The discharge shall remain: UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910 - 142 (formerly 3630605).. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00142

    Original file (ND03-00142.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 (2) One page from Applicant’s service record (2) Statement from Applicant, dated June 15, 2003 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 19990323 – 19990419 COG Active: None Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 19990420 Date of Discharge: 20000320...