Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00562
Original file (ND03-00562.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-ENFA, USN
Docket No. ND03-00562

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20030212. 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 Greensboro, N.C or Charlotte, NC. The Applicant did not list a representative on the DD Form 293. In the acknowledgement letter to the Applicant, he was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing, also advised that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) does not travel, all hearing are held in the Washington National Capital Region.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20040114. 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

 Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

“1. This letter is to the Naval Council of Personnel Boards. I am C___ T___, age 29 and when I entered the navy I was 17. To me then I was a totally a different person mentally and physically. I really enjoyed everything the U.S. Navy done for me and wouldn’t trade the experience for nothing in the world. I didn’t want to get out of the Navy because I disliked it I got out because I was young and didn’t know what the Navy could and would do for my life. I’ve been mad at myself ever since I made that fatal decision. I wish someone would have been there to talk me out of it. The reason I got out of the Navy was, I was stationed in Norfolk, VA and I lived in Nerdsville, NC, about 4 hrs away. I had went home and got involved with this girl fell in love (young and dumb) and got engaged and so we was supposed to get married on March 26, 1994 and we was going on a six months cruise and I wouldn’t be able to get married not thinking to just reschedule it so it was this first class on my ship and he knew my situation so he told me I could get out of the Navy if I went to Captains mast 3 times they would discharge me. So I did it like a youngster would have done. I feel like if I didn’t know that information I would have been in. That was only reason I did it. If you can help me please consider it, I want t come back in the service Army, Navy or any branch. That’s the reason I am reaching out to you. I have 3 kids now and I’m a father with responsibilities and want the best for my family and myself. All I want is an opportunity to prove to you that what I have told you is true. I am a changed man and I feel like the military will make a tremendous impact on my life right now and I will make a difference in it.”
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)     910527 - 911014  COG
         Active: USN                        None

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 911015               Date of Discharge: 940222

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 02 04 08
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 18                          Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 31

 Highest Rate: ETFN

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.60 (2)    Behavior: 3.50 (2)                OTA: 3.60

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM

 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 :

931027:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 128: Assault upon a petty officer, violation of UCMJ, Article 91: Disrespect towards a petty officer, violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence, violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Failure to obey order or regulation.
         Award: 3 days Bread & Water. No indication of appeal in the record.

940201:  Retention Warning [Extracted from CO’s message].

940201:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence; violation of UCMJ, Article 91: Disrespect towards a petty officer.
Award: Forfeiture of ½ pay per month for 1 month (suspended for 4 months). No indication of appeal in the record.
940211:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92: (2 Specifications),Failure to obey order, violation of UCMJ, Article 117: Provoking speeches or gestures.
Award: Forfeiture of $470.00 pay per month for 2 months, restriction for 60 days, reduction to E-2, administrative separation. No indication of appeal in the record.
940211:  USS PETERSON (DD-969) notified Applicant of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.
940211:  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.
940214:  Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.

940218:  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 19940222 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. 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. However, 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.

 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. Evidence of continuing educational pursuits, a positive employment record, an alcohol-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 – 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 | 2004_Navy | ND04-00658

    Original file (ND04-00658.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION A FEW MONTHS HAD GONE BY AND I TOLD FIRST CLASS T_ THAT I DID NOT WANT TO WORK WITH PETTY OFFICER W_. SO I DIDN’T LIKE WHAT HE WAS SAYING TO ME, SO I FINISHED THE JOB AND WENT BACK TO MY DIVISION.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01410

    Original file (ND03-01410.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. I felt that the Navy had let me down I realized that it was wrong and I hated the Navy and their ways after that day I wanted out and I felt to just get out I would just go UA for a while and they would let me go. I swear to you she did push me and I can’t believe how they handled it and all I want to do is go back into time and do things different, but I can’t so I went a...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00082

    Original file (ND04-00082.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND04-00082 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20031017. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. As of this time, the Applicant has not provided any documentation for the Board to consider.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00408

    Original file (ND04-00408.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions. In spite of all my problems, I didn’t abuse drugs or alcohol. By this time I had been away from home for several months, away from my friends and what little family I had.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00612

    Original file (ND04-00612.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The discharge shall remain: UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600. I was young and the recruiter made a deal with me, that cost me my life. Commanding Officer’s comments: SR F_ (Applicant) has been extremely inconsistent since reporting on board in April of last year.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-01330

    Original file (ND04-01330.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review. _______________________________________________________________________ In accordance with 32 C.F.R., section 724.166, and SECNAVINST 5420.174C, enclosure (1), paragraph 1.16, The American Legion submits to the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB or Board) the above issue and following statement in supplement to the Applicant’s petition.Review of the available records reflect that this former member maintained satisfactory...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01120

    Original file (ND03-01120.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After reviewing the Applicant's service record, the Board found that the characterization of the Applicant's discharge as other than honorable was proper and equitable. You should read Enclosure (5) of the Directive before submitting such a complaint. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500392

    Original file (ND0500392.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION Additionally, the Board presumed that the Applicant was properly notified and processed by reason of misconduct due to pattern of misconduct, that he exercised his right to an administrative discharge board, that the Board carefully considered the facts of the case and concluded misconduct occurred, that separation was warranted and...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500567

    Original file (ND0500567.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND05-00567 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20050210. Issues, as stated Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application and letter:“I think that the discharge I received was improper because the reasons for my actions was first when I went on leave and I came back late was because I couldn’t get a ticket to be back on the day I was suppose to be back and I told my command what was going on but I still got put on restriction for 15 days and that was...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00933

    Original file (ND04-00933.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND04-00933 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20040518. I tried my best to be the man the Navy wanted but because of my medical problems which began with a fractured wrist the very first week on a ship. Appeal denied 990402.No Discharge Package PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged on 19990402 under honorable conditions (general) for misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct (A).