Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00499
Original file (ND02-00499.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-AZAN, USN
Docket No. ND02-00499

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 020311, 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 021115. 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, as submitted

 1. During the time I was in the U.S. Navy I was in an active addiction to alcohol. Any disciplinary issues concerning me as a serviceman were directly related to my addiction. I recognize my addiction prevented me from serving my country with the intense desire, which prompted me to enlist. I ask the board to recognize my addiction as a problem and to recognize the contribution I am making to my country as a veteran. In my job as an outreach worker for homeless veterans, I am afforded the opportunity to seek out veterans who suffer from homelessness, unemployment and addiction, and assist them in reintegrating back into society. I am able to share my experiences with my fellow veterans and do offer them a chance to hope and dream again. Even though I am no longer in the active military, I still feel connected to the service of my country. I respectfully request a change in my discharge classification because I am no longer in active addiction; but I am instead using the hope and confidence I've gained through recovery as an example for veterans who still suffer from the pain and despair, which resulted in my addiction.

 Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Copy of DD Form 214
Employment Reference Letter
Reference Letter from Pastor

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: USNR              881121 - 910722  Hon
         Inactive: USNR            880629 - 881120  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 910723               Date of Discharge: 930917

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 02 01 25
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 20                          Years Contracted: 5

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 63

 Highest Rate: AZ3

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.65 (4)    Behavior: 3.70 (4)                OTA: 3.80

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM, SSDR(2 ND ), SASM, BATTLE"E"RIBBON

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 :

910723:  Reenlisted at HELANTISUBRON FIFTEEN for 5 years.

 921009:  Civil Conviction: [Duval County Court, Jacksonville, FL] for Battery (spouse).
 Sentence: pled no contest, adjudicated guilty; 30days/2days credit.
930421:  Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (Alcohol Abuse), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

930421:  Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (Substantial spouse physical abuse/mutual), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

930526:  Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (Lack of proper Military bearing, Core value and improper personal behavior in the Bachelor Enlisted Quarters), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.
        
930624:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 121: Larceny.
         Award: Forfeiture of $541.00 pay per month for 1 month (suspended for 6 months), restriction to 585 for 30 days, extra duty for 30 days, reduction to E-3. No indication of appeal in the record.

930720:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense as evidenced by your CO's NJP on 930624 for larceny and misconduct due to civil conviction as evidenced by your civil conviction on 921009 for battery as reflected in official entries contained in your service record.
930720:          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.
930811:  Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to civil conviction and misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.

930830:  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 930917 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).

 The Applicant’s continuous honorable service from November 21, 1988 to July 11, 1991 should be reflected in his DD Form 214 in Block 18. The Navy Personnel Command has been advised of this administrative error and the original DD Form 214 should be corrected or reissued as appropriate.

The Board examined the equity and propriety within the specific circumstances of the Applicant’s case. The Applicant’s service record is marred by award of civil conviction and non-judicial punishment (NJP). The separation authority directed separation by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense. A characterization of service of under than honorable conditions is warranted when the service member’s conduct constitutes a significant departure from that expected of a sailor. In this case, the Applicant’s misconduct outweighed the positive aspects of his service record. Although the Applicant claims that his disciplinary issues were directly related to his alcohol addiction, 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 discharge was proper and equitable. Relief not warranted.

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, a positive employment record, documentation of community service, certification of non-involvement with civil authorities, are examples of verifiable documents that should be provided to receive consideration for clemency, based on post-service conduct. The evidence submitted by the Applicant does not mitigate his conduct while on active duty. An upgrade based on post-service conduct is not warranted. Relief denied.

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 5, effective
05 Mar 93 until 21 Jul 94, 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 " 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 | 2003_Navy | ND03-01167

    Original file (ND03-01167.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 910812 - 920209 COG Active: USN None Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 920110 Date of Discharge: 930615 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 01 01 05 Inactive: None CA action 930419: Sentence approved and ordered...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00166

    Original file (ND01-00166.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00166 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 001127, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. Relief is denied.The applicant’s second issue states: “The truth is I had requested 4 times with a request chit to be discharged from the service prior to my Captains Masts. My request is to have an honorable discharge, Thank you.” The Board carefully reviewed the applicant’s service record and found no impropriety or...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00462

    Original file (ND04-00462.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND04-00462 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20040121. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00735

    Original file (ND01-00735.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Please allow me to upgrade my discharge like I've stated I've regretted my decision for 8 years. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copies of DD Form 214 (2). 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00105

    Original file (ND01-00105.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Letter from Applicant (3pgs) Response Letter from Applicant (2pgs) Copy of DD Form 214 Congressional correspondence, dated 22 March 2001 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: NONE Inactive: NONE Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 890412 Date of Discharge: 920427 Length of Service...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00502

    Original file (ND00-00502.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION To the review board, I appreciate your time for considering my request for a review. Charge II: violation of the UCMJ, Article 87: Specification: Missed ship's movement through neglect on 25Jan93.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00295

    Original file (ND01-00295.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I was 17 years old at the time and that told me that he wanted me out of the picture. (c) Commanding Officer's Nonjudicial punishment of 2 May 1992, for violation of UCMJ Article 121 (larceny).940111: Applicant advised of her rights and having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to appear before an Administrative Discharge Board.920203: An Administrative Discharge Board, based upon a preponderance of the evidence and by unanimous vote, found that the applicant...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00065

    Original file (ND99-00065.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board will not grant relief on the basis of these issues.The applicant is reminded that the Board is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge (D). At this time, the applicant has not provided any documentation of good character and conduct. You should read Enclosure (5) of the Directive before submitting such a complaint.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00917

    Original file (ND03-00917.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Decision A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20040401. The Applicant has not submitted any documentation to mitigate his misconduct while on active duty.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-01037

    Original file (ND00-01037.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-AR, USN Docket No. I realize that my record of service in the final year of my enlistment was less than admirable, but in my first year I advanced rapidly and had 3.8 performance evaluations. The applicant is reminded that he is eligible for a personal appearance hearing provided the application is received within 15 years from the date of discharge.