Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01234
Original file (ND03-01234.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-FR, USN
Docket No. ND03-01234

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20030716. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions. The Applicant requests a documentary record review. The Applicant did not list any representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20040514. 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 1910-140 (formerly 3630600).

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

 Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

1. “My discharge was inequitable because it was based on incidents that I felt I was right and was punished wrongfully:

Violation of UCMJ Article 92-I did fall asleep, but I was taking medication for a earache giving to me by the doctor onboard. It was known that I couldn’t stand a proper watch, but I was forced to anyway.

Violation of UCMJ Article 90-I stood that watch and was having problems communicating with the commissioned officer. When asked to come to central unit I came and the officer was telling me that I don’t stand proper watches and asked me did I want to be in the Navy. I responded saying I did not want to be in the navy any longer. He said he could hurry my process by sending me to Captains Mast, so I agreed because by this time I wanted out.

Violation of UCMJ Article 91-I was doing mess deck work at the time and the petty officer was doing mess deck work also. He told me to swab the mess deck and I told him to do it because just because he was a petty officer he couldn’t make me do nothing. While you all on mess deck duty that petty officer stuff doesn’t count. So I told him “no” and gave him choice words for asking me to do so.

*Basically some of these charges I could have fought or appealed, but I wanted out so bad till I didn’t care what they were charging me with, long as the end result was being able to leave the navy.*”

 Applicant marked the box indicating “additional issues attached” but none were found.

 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)     960508 - 961112  COG
         Active: USN                        None

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 961113               Date of Discharge: 981028

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 01 11 16
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 19                          Years Contracted: 3

 Education Level: 11                        AFQT: 39

 Highest Rate: FA

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: NMA*        Behavior: NMA             OTA: NMA

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: None

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

* No Marks Available

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-140 (formerly 3630600).

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

970826:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92: (2 Specifications), Failure to obey order or regulation; Specification 1 Having knowledge of a lawful order issued by IC3 A___ H___ to swab the mess decks, an order it was his duty to obey, did, on or about 970813, fail to obey the same, Specification 2: Having knowledge of a lawful order issued by STG1(SW) R___W. F___ to relieve or replace SR J___ J. E___ in the galley, an order it was his duty to obey, did, on or about 970813, fail to obey the same: violation of UCMJ, Article 91: (2 Specifications), Insubordinate conduct toward a Petty Officer, Specification 1: On or about 970813, was disrespectful in language toward RM3 T___ M___, a third class petty officer, who was then in the execution of his office, by saying to him, “Fuck you, you motherfuckers think just because you have a crow, you can tell people what to do, you ain’t worth a fuck, I can back up my shit, you motherfuckers talk a lot of shit, but won’t ever go outside the ship to back it up!” or words to that effect.
         Award: Restriction and extra duty for 30 days. No indication of appeal in the record.

970828:  Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (On 970813, you failed to obey a lawful order issued by STG1(SW) F___ to swab the mess decks and were disrespectful in language towards RM3 M___), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

980616:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: (2 Specifications), Absence without leave, Specification 1: On or about 0500, 980426 without authority fail to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty the mess decks, Specification 1: On or about 0630, 980426 without authority fail to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty the mess decks; violation of UCMJ, Article 91: Insubordinate conduct toward a Warrant Officer, NCO, Petty Officer, having knowledge of a lawful order issued by MS2 K___ S___, to report to the mess desks for duty, an order which it was his duty to obey, did on board USS NICHOLSON, Portsmouth, VA, on or about 0500, 980425, fail to obey the same by not knowingly ignoring the about prescribed lawful order.
Award: Forfeiture of $500.00 pay per month for 2 months, correctional custody for 30 days. No indication of appeal in the record.
980915:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92: (2 Specifications), Dereliction in the performance of duties, Specification 1: On or about 980827, was derelict in the performance of those duties in that he negligently fell asleep on watch as AUX monitor as it was his duty to do so which could have caused substantial damage to the engineering plant, Specification 2: On or about 980828, was derelict in the performance of those duties in that he negligently fell asleep on watch as AUX monitor as it was his duty to do which could have caused substantial damage to the engineering plant; violation of UCMJ, Article 90: (2 Specifications), Disobeying a Superior Commissioned Officer, Specification 1: Having received a lawful order from LT T__ S__, then known by the said to be his superior commissioned officer, to be the engineering officer of the watch, was ordered to stand a proper watch, or words to that effect, did on or about 980827, willfully disobey the same, Specification 2: Having received a lawful order from LT T__ S__, then known by the said to be his superior commissioned officer, to be the engineering officer of the watch, was ordered to stand a proper watch, or words to that effect, did on or about 980828; violation of UCMJ, Article 113: (2 Specifications), Misbehavior of sentinel, Specification 1: On or about 980827, on board USS NICHOLSON (DD-982) underway, being posted as AUX monitor was found asleep upon his post; Specification 2: On or about 980828, on board USS NICHOLSON (DD-982) underway, being posted as AUX monitor was found asleep upon his post.
         Award: Forfeiture of $520.00 pay per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to E-1. No indication of appeal in the record.
980916:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.
980916:  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

981008:  Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct as evidenced by Commanding Officer’s NJP of 970826, 980610, and 980915.

981019:  Commander, Naval Surface Force, U.S. Atlantic Fleet 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 19981028 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. When the service of a member of U.S. Navy has been honest and faithful, it is appropriate to characterize that service as honorable. An Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge is warranted when significant negative aspects of a member's conduct or performance of duty outweigh the positive aspects of the member's military record. The Applicant’s service was marred by three nonjudicial punishment proceedings for violations of the UCMJ, to include two violations of Article 86, two violations of Article 90, two violations of Article 91, four violations of Article 92 and two violations of Article 113. The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, reflects his willful failure to meet the requirements of his contract with the U.S. Navy and falls far short of that required for an upgrade of his characterization of service. Relief is not warranted.

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 documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments or any other evidence related to his discharge 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 18, effective
12 Dec 1997 until 21 Aug 2002, Article 1910-140 (formerly 3630600), SEPARATION BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT - 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 | 2006_Navy | ND0600366

    Original file (ND0600366.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND06-00366 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20051228. The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board’s voted3 to 2 that the discharge shall change to: GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS) BY REASON OF PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00543

    Original file (ND04-00543.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND04-00543 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20040211. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Within 3-days he realized that he was having the same problem as I had and changed the watch schedule so that he had a day watch and could get more sleep.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500297

    Original file (ND0500297.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). 15 days of restriction, 15 days of extra duties, and the forfeiture of $437.00 pay per month for 1 month suspended for 6 months.Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (Misconduct as evidenced by your NJP on 960912, for violations of the UCMJ, Articles 91 (2 Specs) and 128: Failed to obey a lawful order and disrespectful in language and deportment...

  • 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 | ND04-00933

    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).

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-01287

    Original file (ND02-01287.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-01287 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020912, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. 1 was discharged from the navy with a general under honorable condition characterization. To the Naval Discharge Review Board,

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501241

    Original file (ND0501241.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION Petty Officer First Class C_ G_ cursed at me for having the cheeseburger while on watch. 910221: Applicant advised of his rights and following consultation with counsel, elected to appear before an Administrative Discharge Board.910423: An Administrative Discharge Board, based upon the preponderance of evidence and by unanimous vote, found that the Applicant had committed misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense, that such...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500933

    Original file (ND0500933.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION After reviewing these records, I feel that my conduct may not have warranted an other than honorable discharge. At this time, the Applicant has not provided sufficient documentation of post service character and conduct to mitigate the misconduct that resulted in his characterization of discharge.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00154

    Original file (ND04-00154.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND04-00154 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20031104. I did not have duty the following day. Should your misconduct continue you will create an adverse pattern of misconduct which cannot be tolerated), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.880107: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 134: Drinking an alcoholic beverage while under the legal age.Award: 30...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01444

    Original file (ND03-01444.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-01444 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030903. I WAS TOLD TO REPORT CAPTAIN MASS AND HE INFORMED ME THAT BECAUSE I HAD BEEN WRITTEN UP 3 TIMES AND THAT IT SHOWS A PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT AND HE RECOMMEND THAT I BE DISCHARGED UNDER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS. 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.