Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00553
Original file (ND03-00553.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-AOAA, USN
Docket No. ND03-00553

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 20030212, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The Applicant requested a personal appearance hearing discharge review before a traveling panel closest to Atlanta, GA. 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, D.C. Area. Applicant failed to appear for the scheduled personal appearance discharge review. Therefore a documentary review was conducted. The Applicant is not eligible for further review by the Naval Discharge Review Board.

Decision

A documentary review 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/Misconduct - Pattern of misconduct, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

1. “I entered the Navy young, immature and sheltered. I didn’t realize at the time what I was taking on. Although I scored fairly high in A school and Framp School, emotionally I was immature. After about a year of service I began spending time with a girl who was a bad influence on me and guys who also were bad influences. I started slacking on my responsibilities staying out late, oversleeping and some other minor incidences. When I finally realized that my behavior was causing problems with my job I tried turning things around. By this time I felt my superiors had already given up on me and my reputation had been formed. When I was asked to take an early out I decided that might be a good idea. I have always regretted my decision. For the past 13 years I have thought of the military and how much I would’ve liked making a career out of it. I made a bad decision back then and would very much like to re-join the military. I am older now, much more mature and responsible and I have a family. My dedication to my wife has been for the past 13 years and we have two children with one on the way. I feel I can offer the military so much now that I have grown up and I’m ready to use my knowledge and leadership skills in helping serve our military in this time of turmoil. If you would give me the chance to re-enlist I assure you that I will take my job very seriously with maturity and dedication.”

 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)     871023 - 880328  COG
         Active: USN                        None

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 880329               Date of Discharge: 901214

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 01 08 14
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 17                          Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 36

 Highest Rate: AOAN

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.15 (4)    Behavior: 3.05 (4)                OTA: 3.10

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: None

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/Misconduct - Pattern of misconduct, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

890104:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: (2 Specifications), Specification 1: UA from prescribed place of duty on 891209; Specification 2: UA from prescribed place of duty on 891230.
Award: Forfeiture of $200.00 pay per month for 2 months, restriction to NAS OCEANA for 30 days. No indication of appeal in the record.
890912:  UA from 0545 to 1644, 890912 (11 hours).

890921:  Retention Warning from [Fighter Squadron 103]: Advised of deficiency (Unauthorized absence), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

890921:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence.
         Award: Forfeiture of $391.00 pay per month for 2 months (suspended for 3 months). Correctional Custody for 30 days (suspended for 3 months). No indication of appeal in the record.

900829:  Retention Warning from [Fighter Squadron 103]: Advised of deficiency (Violation of UCMJ, Article 92, failing to obey a lawful order; violation of UCMJ, Article 134, wrongfully alter an ID Card), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

901105:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Dereliction of duty on or about 901003, violation of UCMJ, Article 117: Provoking speeches on or about 901003.
         Award: 3 days Bread & Water, forfeiture of $100.00 per month for 2 month. No indication of appeal in the record.
901107:  Released from confinement and returned to full duty.

 901124:  Fighter Squadron 103 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 all punishments under the UCMJ in your current enlistment.
901124:  Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights.
901201:  Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.

901203:  CNMPC 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 19901214 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: Normally, to permit relief, an error or injustice must have existed during the period of enlistment in question. No such error or injustice occurred during the Applicant’s enlistment. While he may feel that his youth and immaturity were contributing factors, they do 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. His service record is marred by award of non-judicial punishment (NJP) on three separate occasions thus substantiating the misconduct. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to change reenlistment codes or make recommendations to permit reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Naval Service or any other branch of the Armed Forces. Neither a less than fully honorable discharge nor an unfavorable “RE” code is, in itself, a bar to reenlistment. A request for waiver is normally done during the processing of a formal application for enlistment through a recruiter. Relief is therefore denied.
Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

 A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560A, Change 8 effective 21 Aug 89 until 14 Aug 91), 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 | 2003_Navy | ND03-01237

    Original file (ND03-01237.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 “Sec Auth.” The Applicant requests a personal appearance hearing discharge review before the Board in the Washington National Capital Region. The applicant’s misconduct, warranting separation for misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and the commission of a serious offense, is clearly documented in the service record. As of this...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500707

    Original file (ND0500707.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND05-00707 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20050308. The Applicant requests the characterization of his service, received at the time of discharge changed to honorable. Here I am in the Navy, at the R.T.C.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00413

    Original file (ND01-00413.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board determined that the applicant’s misconduct was too significant to grant full relief to an Honorable discharge. 901025: CNMPC directed the applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that although the discharge was determined to be proper and equitable at the time of issue (C...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-01144

    Original file (ND99-01144.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION Charge I: violation of the UCMJ, Article 112A: Specification: Wrongfully distribute 1/8 ounce of cocaine on 7Nov90. 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).Responding to the applicant’s issue, the Board found nothing in the records, nor did the applicant provide anything to indicate or to show that there...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00928

    Original file (ND99-00928.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I have that the person or persons reading these reasons understand that at the time that I broke the rules of the U.S. Navy that I was going through a lot of difficult situations. No indication of appeal in the record.910516: Retention Warning from AIRANTISUBRON Three-Two: Advised of deficiency (Article 86 and Article 92. You should read Enclosure (5) of the Directive before submitting such a complaint.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-01109

    Original file (ND04-01109.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND04-01109 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20040629. 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. There I was discharged.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00252

    Original file (ND01-00252.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    890705: Retention Warning from Naval Submarine School: Advised of deficiency (Abandoning watch or guard and failing to go to appointed place of duty at the prescribed time. Award: Forfeiture of $345 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 21 days, reduction to SR. No indication of appeal in the record.891215: Retention Warning from USS PEORIA (LST 1183): Advised of deficiency (Below average performance and non-conformity to naval rules and authority. 901120: Applicant from...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-01245

    Original file (ND02-01245.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-01245 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020906, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. No indication of appeal in the record.960603: Strike Fighter Squadron 192 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 three nonjudicial punishments held on 931124, 940825, and 960602 and by...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00815

    Original file (ND01-00815.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    So I feel that for my time in the service that my discharge should be upgraded to honorable. 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: USN None Inactive: USNR (DEP) 880809 - 880919 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 880920 Date of Discharge: 911101 Length of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00027

    Original file (ND01-00027.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    No indication of appeal in the record.900416: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 91: Insubordinate conduct toward non-commissioned officer on 28Mar90. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560A), Change 8, effective 21 Aug 89 until 14 Aug 91, Article 3630600, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT – COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE. PART IV - INFORMATION FOR THE APPLICANT If you believe that the decision in your case is unclear, not responsive to the issues you...