Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00116
Original file (ND03-00116.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-AO3, USN
Docket No. ND03-00116

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 20021022, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The Applicant requested a personal appearance discharge review before a traveling panel closest to [left blank]. The Applicant did not list any representative on the DD Form 293. In the acknowledgement letter, the Applicant was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) does not travel; all hearings are held in the Washington DC area. The NDRB also advised that the board first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20030926. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the Applicant’s service was discovered by the NDRB. 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 1910-144 (formerly 3630610).
PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as submitted

1. I (Applicant) feel I served my country for 7 ½ yrs, with three bad decisions at one duty station, that ended up costing me my career in the Navy. I feel if the Board reviews my record & all my evaluations throughout my career. I feel that I was a great asset to every duty station I served at. I deserve I Honorable Discharge so I can use the money I paid a year for while in Navy to better myself with more schooling, I learned a big lesson while in the Navy. Attending men at peace really helped & I complete a 26 week class of anger management which also helps a lot. So please review my record & make the right decision. Thanks again

 Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Applicant’s DD Form 214
Sixty-six pages from Applicant service record

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     19911115 – 19920322      COG
         Active: USNR              19920323 – 19940901      HON

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 19940902             Date of Discharge: 19980724

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 03 10 23
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 22                          Years Contracted: 5

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 35

 Highest Rate: AO3

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.9 (2)     Behavior: 4.0 (2)                 OTA: 4.0 (4.0 evals)
3.8 (4) 3.25 (4) 3.28 (5.0 evals)

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: GCM, NDSM, SSDR, Letter of Commendation, SASM with Bronze Star

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

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

GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/MISCONDUCT, authority: MILPERSMAN, Article 1910-144 (formerly 3630610).

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

961120:  Civil Conviction: Violation of driving under the influence on 961004.
 Sentence: Fine $500.00, jail for 90 days. Jail suspended.
970115:  Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (Civil conviction of 961120, for operating under the influence.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

970702:  Civil Conviction: Violation of operating a motor vehicle after suspension of drivers license on 970504.
 Sentence: Fine $200.00.
980304:  Civil Conviction: Violation of conditions of bail release on 980227.
 Sentence: Fine $150.00 and five days in jail (time served).
980415:  Retention Warning: No information found in service record. [Extracted from Commanding Officer’s letter dated 980807.]

 980513:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct, misconduct due to commission of a serious offense and misconduct due to civil conviction.
980514:  Applicant advised of rights and having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to appear before an Administrative Discharge Board.
980608:  Applicant arrested for having an unauthorized guest in his BEQ room.

 980611:  An Administrative Discharge Board found that the Applicant had committed misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct, commission of a serious offense and a civil conviction, based upon a preponderance of the evidence and by unanimous vote. The Discharge Board voted that the misconduct warranted separation, and recommended discharge general (under honorable conditions) and discharge be suspended for 12 months.

980623:  Commanding Officer, NAS Brunswick recommended to Commander Northeast Region discharge general (under honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct, commission of a serious offense, and civil conviction.

980709:  COMSUBGRU TWO directed discharge general (under honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct due to civil conviction.

980807:  Commanding Officer, NAS Brunswick recommended to Bureau of Naval Personnel discharge general (under honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct, commission of a serious offense, and civil conviction.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 19980724 with a general (under honorable conditions) for misconduct due to civil conviction (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 states he served his country 7.5 years with three bad decisions at one duty station. He also states he was a great asset; wants to use the money he contributed in to the educational benefits, and has attended anger management for 26 weeks.

It is unfortunate that the Applicant’s 7.5 years of service, during which time he may have been an asset, were marred by his misconduct. But the record shows that the Applicant was given two opportunities to change his behavior when his Commanding Officer issued a retention warning on 970115 and again on 980415. The Applicant failed to conform to the conditions of the retention warnings and was justifiably discharged. The NDRB does not determine eligibility for educational benefits. The Applicant will have to contact the Department of Veterans Affairs to address this issue. The Board recognizes the Applicant’s attempt at controlling his anger, however 26 weeks of anger management do not warrant an upgrade to his discharge. Relief denied.

 The following is provided for the edification of the Applicant. Normally, to permit relief, an error or inequity must have occurred during the period of enlistment in question. No errors or inequities were discovered during the execution of the Applicant’s discharge. The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. However, 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 the civilian life subsequent to leaving the service. 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 the period of service under review can be considered. Examples of documentation to forward to the Board include proof of educational pursuits, verifiable employment record(s), documentation of community service, certification of non-involvement with civil authorities, and credible evidence of a substance free lifestyle (if appropriate). At this time, the applicant has not provided sufficient documentation for the Board to consider. Therefore, no relief will be granted.
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. Representation at a personal appearance hearing is recommended but not required.
Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

 A. The Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 18, effective 12 Dec 97 to 31 Aug 98, Article 1910-144 (previously 3630610), Separation by Reason of Misconduct - Civilian Conviction.

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 | 2004_Navy | ND04-00189

    Original file (ND04-00189.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    His conduct clearly warrants administrative separation under other than honorable conditions.020326: Commanding Officer, NAS, Lemoore authorized the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to civil conviction. As of this time, the Applicant has not provided any documentation for the Board to consider. The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00269

    Original file (ND04-00269.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board further found that the misconduct and erroneous enlistment warranted separation, and recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions. Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to civil conviction.021217: Commander, Naval Training Center, Great Lakes directed the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to civil conviction. PART IV - INFORMATION FOR THE...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01249

    Original file (ND03-01249.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Documentation In addition to the service record, 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) 951129 - 951210 COG Active: USN None Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 951211 Date of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00689

    Original file (ND00-00689.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    No relief will be granted based on this issue.In the applicant’s issue 2, the Board did not find any proficiency or conduct marks in the applicant’s service record. The Board found that the applicant was only in the service for 1 year and 4 months and had 2 civil convictions. At this time, the applicant has not provided any documentation of good character and conduct.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-01262

    Original file (ND04-01262.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I am requesting that you review the testimony and if necessary review my previous service record to see that I had never been charged with any offense before this time. Applicant)” Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 740901 - 740922 COG Active: USN 740923 -...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00448

    Original file (ND02-00448.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Civil charges resolved.980727: DD Form 214: Applicant discharged under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to civil conviction. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged on 980727 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to a civil conviction (A). 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00468

    Original file (ND01-00468.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00468 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010227, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable and the reason for the discharge be changed to completed service. Willing to waive the administrative board if given an honorable discharge with the understanding that if request is denied, admin separation processing will continue and will have the right to elect an admin board or hearing.000316: Commanding officer...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-01060

    Original file (ND00-01060.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 991104 general under honorable conditions for misconduct due to civil conviction (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).In response to the applicant’s issue 1, the Board thoroughly reviewed the applicant’s service record and determined a general...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00017

    Original file (ND00-00017.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00017 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 991006, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 981103 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to civil conviction (A). At this time, the applicant has not provided any documentation of good character and conduct.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01193

    Original file (ND03-01193.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    My record of convictions by civil authorities while I was in service indicates only one offense that had adjudication (not a conviction) of guilt withheld and probation terminated prior to my discharge from the United States Navy as presented in my background above. I have struggled since my discharge reconciling how my only evaluation (Supporting Document 7) can recommend me for promotion while Captain S_ states my “conduct has been detrimental to the good order and discipline of Naval...