Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00172
Original file (ND03-00172.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-STSSA, USN
Docket No. ND03-00172

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20021105. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review. The Applicant did not designate a representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20040617. 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 3630600.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

 Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

“Honorable gentlemen fo this board, I beseech you to consider the evidence presented as substantial cause to upgrade my current UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS discharge to HONORABLE. I believe that my post-service behavior merits an upgrade in discharge status for the following reasons:

Issue 1. Use DOCUMENT 1.
I earned a Bachelor’s and a Master’s degree in four and a half years, with a GPA not less than 3.3. My academic accomplishments contradict my UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS discharge for misconduct as a predictor of future behavior.

Issue 2. Use DOCUMENT 2.
I have been gainfully employed by Concurrent Technologies Corporation, a non-profit engineering firm with several major Navy GSA contracts, since 20000508. My sustained employment and work accomplishments contradict my UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS discharge for misconduct as a predictor of future behavior.

Issue 3. Use DOCUMENT 3.
 I have been an upstanding citizen in my community since my discharge. My civic conduct contradicts my UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS discharge for misconduct as a predictor of future behavior. ”

Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Copy of DD Form 214
DOCUMENT 1 – University of South Florida official transcript
 DOCUMENT 2 – concurrent Technologies Corporation W-2 (2000- 2001), Direct Deposit stub
 DOCUMENT 3 – City of Tampa Police Department Criminal check

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     900509 - 900723  COG
         Active: None

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 900724               Date of Discharge: 960305

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 05 07 12
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 18                          Years Contracted: 4 (24 months extension)

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 73

 Highest Rate: STS3

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: NMF*        Behavior: NMF             OTA: NMF

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM, NEM, SSDR, CGSOR, Marksmanship Ribbon (.45 Cal Pistol – sharpshooter)

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

*No Marks Found in service record.

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

GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

910912:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 111: Drunken or reckless driving.
 Award: Forfeiture of $200.00 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to E-1. No indication of appeal in the record.
911004:  Recruit Medical Annex/Branch Medical Clinic, NTC, Great Lakes, IL:
 19 year old male with DUI on 25 Aug 91. Referral from CAAC/DAPA and command. Frequency – 6 beers a week. No history of other alcohol related incidents. Father with alcoholism died when pt age 3. Pt does not fulfill DSM111r CRITERIA FOR ALCOHOL DEPENDENCY. Level II advised by CAAC. Agree with that recommendation.
950706:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 128 (2 Specs)
 Specification 1: Assault upon a petty officer
Specification 2: Assault consummated by a battery
          Award: Forfeiture of $200.00 per month for 2 months( suspended for 6 months), restriction and extra duty for 28 days, reduction to next inferior pay grade (suspended for six months). No indication of appeal in the record.

951218:  Punishment of reduction in rate and forfeiture of $200 pay per month for two months, suspended at CO’s NJP of 06JUL95 vacated due to continued misconduct.
951218:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 111: Drunken or reckless driving.
         Award: Forfeiture of one-half months pay per month for 2 months (suspended), restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to E-2. No indication of appeal in the record.

960202:  Medical Dept, Submarine Squadron Two: CAAC eval reviewed. Previous Level II for DUI (1991).
         Assessment/Plan: Agree with diagnosis of alcohol dependent, not physically dependent. Offer Level III upon discharge. Detox not indicated.

ADMIN DISCHARGE PACKAGE NOT CONTAINED IN SERVICE RECORD

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 19960305 with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (A). In the absence of a discharge package, the Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (B) and, after a thorough review of available records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, found that the discharge was proper and equitable (C and D).

Issues 1, 2 & 3: 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. At this time, the Board determined that the documentation submitted by the Applicant concerning his post-service does not mitigate his misconduct while on active duty. Relief denied.

In the Applicant’s case, the Board could discern no impropriety or inequity and therefore considered the Applicant’s discharge proper and equitable. A characterization of service of general (under honorable conditions) is warranted when the service member’s conduct constitutes a departure from that expected of a Sailor. The Applicant’s service record is marred by award of non-judicial punishment (NJP) on three separate occasions including violation of UCMJ, article 111 thus substantiating the misconduct . The Applicant’s summary of service clearly reflects the Applicant ’ s disobedience of the orders and directives that regulate good order and discipline in the naval service, and demonstrated he was unsuitable for further service. An upgrade to honorable would be inappropriate. 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 documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments or any other evidence related to his discharge 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 9, effective
22 Jul 94 until 02 Oct 96, 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 | 1999_Navy | ND99-01042

    Original file (ND99-01042.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION 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 found that the applicant had 3 NJPs in addition to being an alcohol rehabilitation failure. PART IV - INFORMATION FOR THE APPLICANT If you believe that the decision in your case is unclear, not responsive to the issues...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00136

    Original file (ND04-00136.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION “Equity Issue: Based on our review of evidentiary record and on behalf of this former member, we request that the Board consider provisions of SECNAVINST 5420.174C, enclosure (1), Chapter 9, as it pertains to post-service conduct, in assessing the merits of this application. _________________________________________________________________ In accordance with 32 C.F.R., section 724.166, and SECNAVINST 5420.174C, enclosure (1), paragraph 1.16,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00495

    Original file (ND04-00495.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    [Extracted from Commanding Officer’s letter dated 970331]970218: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct as evidenced by two CO’s NJP dated 960927 and 961219 and refusal of alcohol rehabilitation.Undated: Applicant advised of rights and having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to appear before an Administrative Discharge Board. 970321: An...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01083

    Original file (ND03-01083.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-01083 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030604. Issues, as stated Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:“Attached is all the information including all issues which are listed on the second document and listed A thru H. I am respectfully requesting to have my discharge and or re-enlistment code up-graded so we can review the possibility of my re-enlisting in military service and serving our great nation with honor.” f) Failure of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00150

    Original file (ND00-00150.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant declined treatment.960723: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under Other Than Honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the Commission of a serious offense as evidence by violation of UCMJ, Article 111 (Drunken driving) and Alcohol abuse rehabilitation failure, when he refused to participate in Level II Alcohol treatment.960723: Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ, Article 27B,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00026

    Original file (ND00-00026.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 (2 copies) Letter from Paralyzed Veterans of America dated September 28, 1999 Thirty-eight pages from applicant's medical record PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: USNR (DEP) 960710 - 981211 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 961230 Date of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00107

    Original file (ND00-00107.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00107 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 991027, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. I have also had numerous treatments for alcoholism, in the service and since being separated. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 Illinois Treatment Verification Applicant's...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00453

    Original file (ND00-00453.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 970519 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to drug abuse (use) (A). The applicant clearly established a pattern of misconduct in his 10 months of service that warranted a discharge under other than honorable conditions. The NDRB found no impropriety in the applicant’s discharge.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00104

    Original file (ND01-00104.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00104 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 001030, 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 (C and D).The applicant’s first issue states that his discharge was inequitable since it was based on “two isolated incidents, neither of which were...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00871

    Original file (ND99-00871.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Member signed page 13 accepting Level III treatment for drug abuse. Service member will be administratively separated after completion of Level III treatment for both alcohol and drugs. 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).In response to applicant’s issue 1, the applicant implies that a permissive doctrine exists whereby one in the military is allowed...