Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00487
Original file (ND03-00487.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-FR, USNR
Docket No. ND03-00487

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20030130. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable and the reason for the discharge be changed to medical. The Applicant requests 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 20031229. 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 and reason for discharge was discovered by the NDRB. The Board’s vote was unanimous that the character and reason for the discharge shall not change. The discharge shall remain: GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

 Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

“1. Not well grounded claim for disability unsuccessful, and I feel that my character of service should be changed to uncharacterized. Since medical complications are vented me from functioning. Would like to have discharge changed to medical separation.”
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)     None
         Active: USN                        None

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 940728               Date of Discharge: 951013

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 00 11 17
         Inactive: 00 02 29

 Age at Entry: 20                          Years Contracted: 3

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 41

 Highest Rate: FR

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 2.80 (1)    Behavior: 2.80 (1)                OTA: 2.80

 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)/PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

941027:  Commenced 36 months of active duty under the Airman Apprenticeship training program.

950811:  Retention Warning from [Naval Air Facility, Adak, AK]: Advised of deficiency (Violation of UCMJ Article 86-Obsessive Unauthorized Absences- (7 Specifications); violation of UCMJ Article 92-Order violation-incomplete assigned EMI.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

950811:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: (7 Specifications), Unauthorized absence; violation of UCMJ, Article 92: (3 Specifications), Failure to obey a lawful order on 950724.
         Award: Forfeiture of $431.00 pay per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days. No indication of appeal in the record.
950814:  Naval Air Facility Adak 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 nonjudicial punishment of 950811.
950816:  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.
950823:  Commanding Officer recommended discharge general (under honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. Commanding Officer’s comments (verbatim): [AR S_ (Applicant) has been a burden on this command since he arrived. He has committed minor infractions under the UCMJ, required constant supervision; and has had numerous counseling sessions, including a formal counseling session (NAVPERS 1060/613, Administrative Warning/Counseling) after his non-judicial punishment. The chain of command has given him many opportunities to correct his deficiencies and he has failed. SR S_ has shown no desire to improve his work and he does not want to be in the Navy. Due to his pattern of misconduct consisting of minor infractions and violation of his NAVPERS 1060/613, Administrative Warning/Counseling, he warrants a general discharge under honorable conditions.]

950928:  BUPERS directed the Applicant's discharge general (under 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 19951013 with a characterization of general (under 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: A characterization of service of general (under honorable conditions) is warranted when the member’s conduct constitutes a departure from that expected of a Sailor. The Applicant’s service was marred by award of nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for numerous offenses including unauthorized absence and failure to obey a lawful order. The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, falls short of that required for an honorable characterization of service. An upgrade to honorable would be inappropriate. Additionally, only members discharged within the first 180 days of their first enlistment can be given this kind of discharge. Since the Applicant served in excess of 6 months, he cannot be given an uncharacterized or entry level separation. To change character of service or the narrative reason for separation would be inappropriate. Relief denied.

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. 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. E vidence of continuing educational pursuits, a positive employment record, 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 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 | 1999_Navy | ND99-00036

    Original file (ND99-00036.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 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: USNR (DEP) 920602 - 920609 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 920610 Date of Discharge: 940204 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 01 07 25 Inactive: None The record is devoid of evidence that...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00550

    Original file (ND02-00550.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I have worked in the same field since leaving the Navy and I'm responsible for my actions.I'm asking to have my discharge upgraded because I was so young and made mistakes but my hope is to not have this held against me my whole life. No indication of appeal in the record.910520: USS PUGET SOUND (AD 38) notified Applicant of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and alcohol abuse rehabilitation...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00505

    Original file (ND02-00505.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    CO's letter has the date of NJP as 5Jun96 vice 23Jun96.950724: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.950724: 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. After a...

  • 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 | 2003_Navy | ND03-00331

    Original file (ND03-00331.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Thank you, A_ E_ V_ S_ (Applicant) The Applicant has not provided any documentation for the Board to consider.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00500

    Original file (ND04-00500.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND04-00500 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20040204. We refer this case to the Board for their careful and compassionate consideration.” 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) 911028 - 920908 COG Active: USN None Period of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00500

    Original file (ND99-00500.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Decision A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 991213. Specifically, the Former Service Member (FSM) is seeking an upgrade inhis discharge from Other Than Honorable (OTH) to Honorable or General, Under Honorable Conditions.The FSM contends his discharge was not due to his conduct. Relief not warranted.The applicant’s third issue, stated by the DAV, contends the applicant was discharged due to a miscommunication between himself and other personnel rather than...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00458

    Original file (ND99-00458.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :961024: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Willfully derelict in the performance of duties by sleeping in the #1 main machinery room while standing the shaft alley patrol watch. The applicant received a retention warning after the first NJP, but violated the same article a second time. Outstanding post-service conduct, to the extent that such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the applicant’s performance and...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00429

    Original file (ND04-00429.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. 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. 950404: Reduction to E-3 awarded at CO’s NJP of 941104 vacated this date due to continued misconduct.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00013

    Original file (ND00-00013.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    (EQUITY ISSUE) His violation of the UCMJ notwithstanding, this former member opines that his otherwise creditable service period is sufficient to warrant an honorable discharge.2. EQUITY ISSUE) His violation of the UCMJ notwithstanding, this former member opines that his otherwise creditable service period is sufficient to warrant an honorable discharge.” The NDRB reviewed the applicant’s service record and found that due regard was placed on the applicant’s service record when the general...