Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00317
Original file (ND03-00317.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-OSSA, USN
Docket No. ND03-00317

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20021211. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The Applicant requests a personal appearance hearing discharge review before a Traveling Panel closest to Albuquerque, NM. 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) first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing.

 Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20031121. 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/MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

 No issues were submitted by the Applicant.

Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Attachment A: 4 pages
Attachment B: 1 page
Enlistment Performance Evaluation Report (2 pages)
Copy of DD Form 214

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: NMARNG                  910325 - 911018  HON
 Inactive: USNR (DEP)     920106 - 920419  COG
          Active: USN                        None

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 920420               Date of Discharge: 940517

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 02 00 28
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 18                          Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 55

 Highest Rate: OSSN

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.93 (3)    Behavior: 3.20 (3)                OTA: 3.53

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM, SSDR, BATTLE”E”

 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 :

MICROFICHE IS NOT COMPLETELY LEGIBLE

940323:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 112a: Wrongful use of marijuana on 940313.
         Award: Forfeiture of $466.00 pay per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to E-2. No indication of appeal in the record.
940429:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense and drug abuse as evidenced by non-judicial punishment.
940429:  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.
940502:  Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.

940504:  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 19940517 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 did not introduce any decisional issues for the Board’s consideration. A characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions is warranted when the member’s conduct constitutes a significant departure from that expected of a Sailor. While he states that he committed the offense because he was not allowed to attend BUD/S, it does not mitigate the Applicant’s disobedience of the orders and directives that regulate good order and discipline in the naval service, demonstrating he was unsuitable for further service. The Applicant’s service was marred by award of nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for illegal drug use. The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, reflect his 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.

T here 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, a drug-free lifestyle, and certification of community service and non-involvement with civil authorities are examples of verifiable proof that can be submitted.

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 | ND03-00563

    Original file (ND03-00563.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:Copy of DD Form 214. Additionally, t he Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing educational opportunities as requested in the issue.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00368

    Original file (ND00-00368.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In the applicant’s issue 1, the applicant states that he was “young” and that his “knowledge about the military was nil” and the “navy did not counsel me they just punished me.” The applicant had significant misconduct, both in the service and in the civilian sector. Regardless of an Administrative Board's recommendation, CHNAVPERS is Separation Authority for members being separated by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense as evidenced by sexual perversion or sexual...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00951

    Original file (ND00-00951.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 Three pages from applicant's service record PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: USNR (DEP) 880831 - 881113 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 881114 Date of Discharge: 890530 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 00 06 17 Inactive:...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00635

    Original file (ND99-00635.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 921229 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (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).The applicant introduced no decisional issues for consideration by the Board. Naval Military Personnel...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00405

    Original file (ND99-00405.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    900612: CNMPC 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 900615 under Other Than Honorable conditions for misconduct due to Commission of a Serious Offense (A and B). After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00276

    Original file (ND02-00276.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 Statement dated March 12, 1997 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: USNR (DEP) 940429 - 950118 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 950118 Date of Discharge: 970502 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 02 03 15 Inactive: None PART III...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-01044

    Original file (ND00-01044.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The discharge shall remain: UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/MISCONCDUCT – Commission of a serious offense, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600. 880318: Chief of Naval Personnel recommended to Assistant Secretary of the Navy (Manpower and Reserve Affairs) discharge under Other Than Honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the Commission of a serious offense. 880321: Assistant Secretary of the Navy (Manpower and Reserve Affairs) directed discharge under Other Than...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00992

    Original file (ND03-00992.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:Statement from Applicant, undated Applicant’ s DD Form 214 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 860131 - 860824 COG Active: None Period of Service...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00873

    Original file (ND01-00873.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00873 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010621, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions. 891203: CNMPC directed the applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense. You may view DoD Directive 1332.28 and other Decisional Documents by going online at " afls10.jag.af.mil ".The names, and...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00181

    Original file (ND01-00181.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00181 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 001130, 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 issue states: “(Equity Issue) This former member request that the Board include provisions of SECNAVINST 5420.174C., enclosure...