Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00258
Original file (ND03-00258.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-OSSR, USN
Docket No. ND03-00258

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 20021126, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions. 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 20031017. 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: UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

1. “To whom it may concern
I was young and wasn’t ready to join the service and I wish I could take back all my mistake I made over the years in the service. I also wish I could do it again because I would have been in the Navy for 8 years. But I made a stupid mistake because I thought I knew everything. Now I wish the board can change discharge so I could be a positive role model for myself and kids. Thanks S_ D_ S_”

 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)     19931228 – 19940123      COG
         Active: None

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 19940124             Date of Discharge: 19960516

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 02 03 23
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 20                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 61

 Highest Rate: OSSN

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.50 (2)    Behavior: 3.20 (2)                OTA: 3.50

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM, NUC, SSDR

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

950608:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Absence from unit on 950531.
         Award: Forfeiture of $450 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to OSSR. Reduction suspended for 6 months. No indication of appeal in the record.
951228:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence from 0700-0915, 951128.
         Award: Forfeiture of $478 per month for 1 month, restriction and extra duty for 30 days, reduction to OSSA. No indication of appeal in the record.
951228:  Retention Warning from USS PENSACOLA (LSD 38): Advised of deficiency (Unauthorized absence.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

960409:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 91: Dereliction of duty on 960323, violation of UCMJ, Article 110: Hazarding a vessel on 960323.
         Award: Reduction to OSSR. No indication of appeal in the record.
960411:  USS PENSACOLA (LSD 38) notified Applicant of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct as evidenced by your violations of the UCMJ.
960411:  Applicant advised of 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.
960416:  Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.

960419:  BUPERS directed the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 19960516 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct (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 that he was young and not ready to join the Service. He wants to be a role model for himself and his children.

The Applicant’s was qualified and voluntarily enlisted into the Navy. Subsequently, he committed misconduct, received a retention warning, then, failed to comply with the conditions of the retention warning and was held accountable. The Applicant can continue to be a role model to his children by being a productive member of society. The discharge was proper and equitable. Relief denied.

 Normally, to permit relief, an error or inequity must have occurred during the execution of the discharge for the period of enlistment in question. No errors or inequities were discovered during the execution of this 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 any documentation for the Board to consider. Therefore, no relief will be granted.
The applicant is reminded that he is 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 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 – A PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT.

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 | 2001_Navy | ND01-00011

    Original file (ND01-00011.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION It doesn't get you nowhere.” The NDRB found this issue non decisional. Regret and remorse alone are no basis upon which the Board can grant relief.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00252

    Original file (ND02-00252.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00252 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020114, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. OSSR E_ (Applicant) is recommended to receive an Other Than Honorable Discharge from the naval service. Relief denied.The applicant is reminded he remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing provided an application is received within 15 years from the date of discharge

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00807

    Original file (ND02-00807.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00807 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020515, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. No indication of appeal in the record.000229: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: (2 Specification), Unauthorized absence, violation of UCMJ Article 134: Appeal denied 000313.Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (Violation of Article 86: Unauthorized Absence from 0700, 000224 to 1600, 000224; and from 0700,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00663

    Original file (ND99-00663.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Award: Forfeiture of $347.00 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to MSSA. 860224: An Administrative Discharge Board, based upon a preponderance of the evidence and by unanimous vote, found that the applicant had committed misconduct due to a drug abuse and misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct, that the misconduct warranted separation, and recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions. 860716: Commanding officer recommended discharge...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00007

    Original file (ND99-00007.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND99-00007 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 981001, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. No indication of appeal in the record.870401: Commanding Officer, Naval Hospital,Pensacola notified applicant of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct, commission of a serious offense and civilian...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00459

    Original file (ND99-00459.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-SR, USN Docket No. Age at Entry: 19 Years Contracted: 4 Education Level: 12 AFQT: 36 Highest Rate: SR Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks): Performance: 2.00 (1) Behavior: 2.90 (2) OTA: 2.80 Military Decorations: None Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: None Days of Unauthorized Absence: 2 Character, Narrative Reason, and Authority of Discharge (at time of issuance):UNDER...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00862

    Original file (ND00-00862.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    No indication of appeal in the record.900202: Retention Warning from USS PENSACOLA: Advised of deficiency (being late for quarters approximately 1 hour & 55 minutes), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning900202: Unauthorized absence from 0730, 2 Feb 90. No indication of appeal in the record.900519: Retention Warning from USS PENSACOLA: Advised of deficiency (to be on time and at place of duty,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00690

    Original file (ND02-00690.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB also advised that the board first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing. No indication of appeal in the record.960411: Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (Misconduct as evidenced by your CO's NJP on 11 April 1996 for violations of the UCMJ, Article 86 (3 specifications) failure to go to appointed place of duty (X2) and going from appointed place of duty. No indication of appeal in the record.970313: DD Form 214: Applicant discharged general...

  • 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 | 1999_Navy | ND99-01039

    Original file (ND99-01039.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Commanding officer’s comments (verbatim): "I strongly agree with the Board's findings and recommend that OSSR (Applicant) be administratively discharged from the naval service by reason of his misconduct due to commission of a serious offense and misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct, and that the characterization of his discharge be under Other Than Honorable conditions. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the...