Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-01025
Original file (ND02-01025.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-CTTSA, USN
Docket No. ND02-01025

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 020711, 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 030410. 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: GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630605.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as submitted

1. I would like for my discharge to be changed because I had had a few incidents that all happened within a couple of months. My immediate supervisors were not fair and did not listen to reason even with proof of my innocence. I am not saying I handled everything the way I was supposed to, but I don't want to go through life with knowing that I got something other than, "Honorable discharge". I would like for my children to go into the military, if they wish. It would be hard from me to say do your service honorably if I can not show them I did.

 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)     940622 - 950611  COG
         Active: None

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 950612               Date of Discharge: 961101

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 01 04 20
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 18                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 72

 Highest Rate: CTTSN

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 1.00 (1)    Behavior: 1.00 (1)                OTA: 1.80

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

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

GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630605.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

951102:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92 (2 specs): (1) Disobey a lawful order by wrongfully having a male guest in barracks room on 951002, (2) disobey a lawful order by failing to complete the 1000 word essay and 10-minute presentation assigned to her for extra military instruction.
         Award: Correctional custody for 30 days. No indication of appeal in the record.
951102:  Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (Article 92 (2 specs): Disobeying a lawful order), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.
        
960118:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Failure to go at the time prescribed to appointed place of duty on 0740, 951210, to wit: Color Guard Detail.
         Award: Forfeiture of $100 per month for 1 month, restriction and extra duty for 15 days, reduction to CTTSA. Forfeiture and reduction suspended for 6 months. No indication of appeal in the record.
960924:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 134: False or unauthorized pass offenses, to wit: military identification card, indicating she was 21 years of age, for the purchase of alcoholic beverages.
         Award: Forfeiture of $490.35 per month for 1 month, extra duty for 45 days, reduction to CTTSA. No indication of appeal in the record.
961004:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge general (under honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct due a pattern of misconduct and misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense as evidenced by all punishments under the UCMJ in the current enlistment.
961004:  Applicant advised of her 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.
961024:  Commanding Officer directed discharge under honorable conditions (general) 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 961101 under honorable conditions (general) for misconduct due to the 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. A characterization of service of under honorable conditions (general) is warranted when significant negative aspects of a member's conduct or performance of duty outweigh the positive aspects of the member's military record. T he Applicant’s service was marred by award of nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on three occasions and an adverse counseling entry on another occasion. The Board found nothing in the record to support the Applicant’s claim that she was inequitably charged with the above offenses. The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of her service, reflects her disobedience of the orders and directives which regulate good order and discipline in the naval service, and falls short of that required for an honorable characterization of service. An upgrade to honorable would be inappropriate. Relief denied.

 The Applicant’s discharge characterization accurately reflects her service to her country. Normally, to permit relief, an error or inequity must have existed during the period of enlistment in question. No such error or inequity 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. Relief denied.

The Applicant is reminded that she remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of her discharge. 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 14, effective
03 Oct 96 until 971212, Article 3630605, 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 | 2000_Navy | ND00-00562

    Original file (ND00-00562.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00562 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000403, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. 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).Although the applicant’s discharge package was missing, the Board assumed...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-01012

    Original file (ND02-01012.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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: Normally, to permit relief, an error or injustice must have existed during the period of enlistment in question. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01112

    Original file (ND03-01112.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. Award: Forfeiture of $690 per month for 1 month, restriction and extra duty for 15 days, reduction to CTTSA.020618: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.020618: Applicant advised of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00838

    Original file (ND00-00838.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00838 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000628, 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 (D and E).The applicant’s representative submitted the following as issue 1: (Equity Issue) This former member contends that there were extenuating...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00569

    Original file (ND04-00569.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 and 215 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 001028 - 001115 ELS USNR (DEP) 010228 – 010321 COG Active: None Period of Service...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00826

    Original file (ND00-00826.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of Record of Military Processing Form (2pgs) Copy of High School Record Copy of Evaluation Report & Counseling Record Letters from Attorney at Law (3) Copy of DD From 214 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: USN None Inactive: USNR (DEP) 980031 - 980408 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01067

    Original file (ND03-01067.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 Service Record (3 pages) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 990524 - 990527 COG Active: None Period of Service...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00916

    Original file (ND04-00916.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. The Applicant contends that his problems in the Navy can be attributed to his mother’s illness and personal stress. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00848

    Original file (ND04-00848.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. The navy should have been my career, but I allowed personal feelings get in the way of that. I thank you for your time and hope to hear from you soon.Former serviceman,” Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Job reference, dated November 12, 2003Applicant’s DD...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00563

    Original file (ND99-00563.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION That seems like an honorable action to me. Charge III: violation of UCMJ, Article 121, Did, on or about 23 June 97 steal a laptop computer, property of the US Government.