Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01335
Original file (ND03-01335.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-AT3, USN
Docket No. ND03-01335

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20030806. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The Applicant requests a documentary record review. The Applicant did not designate a representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20040608. After a thorough review of the available 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: GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910 - 142 (formerly 3630605).

 The NDRB did note administrative error(s) on the original DD Form 214. Block 18, Remarks Block 18, Remarks, should contain the following statement: “CONTINUOUS HONORABLE ACTIVE DUTY FROM 90OCT25 UNTIL 95OCT22,” and Block 25, Separation Authority, should read: “NAVMILPERSMAN 1910-142” vice “MPM 3630600.” The Commander, Naval Personnel Command, Millington, TN, will be notified, recommending the DD Form 214 be corrected or reissued, as appropriate.



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 one isolated incident in 7 years 8 months of active duty service. Please review my records prior to the incident and it will show I was a model sailor in every aspect.”

Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Copy of DD Form 214
Certificate of Completion, Enlisted Aviation Warfare Specialist, dtd Oct 18, 1994
Certificate of Good Conduct Award dtd Jul 15, 1994
Certificate of Good Conduct Award dtd Jul 17, 1997
Certificate of Navy and Marine Corps Achievement Medal dtd Nov 7, 1997
 Certificate of Navy and Marine Corps Achievement Medal dtd May 15, 1996
Letter of Appreciation, USS GEORGE WASHINGTON (CVN 73), dtd Oct 23, 1992
Pukin’ Dog of the Month for June 1993 Letter, dtd Aug 5, 1993
Letter of Appreciation, Fighter Squadron 143, dtd Aug 27, 1993
Letter of Commendation, Fighter Squadron 143, (Sep to Nov 95)
Letter of Appreciation, Commander George Washington Battle Group, (11/12 Jul 94)
 Letter of Commendation, Commander George Washington Battle Group (20 May 94 to 17 Nov 94)
 Applicant’s Performance Eval (7 evals)

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: USNR   900716 - 901024  COG
         Active: USNR     901025 - 951022  HON

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 951023               Date of Discharge: 980629

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 02 08 07
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 22                          Years Contracted: 5

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 77

 Highest Rate: AT2

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.67 (3)    Behavior: 2.67 (3)                OTA: 3.2

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM, NUC, SSDR, SWAS (w/Bronze Star), MUC, LoC, Gold Wreath (3), NAM (2)

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

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

GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-142 (formerly 3630605).

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

951023:  Reenlisted for five years at VF-143, NAS Oceana, VA.

 980227:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 84: Effecting unlawful enlistments.
         Award: Forfeiture of one-half month’s pay for 2 months (suspended except for $200), extra duty for 45 days, reduction to E-4. No indication of appeal in the record. [EXTRACTED FROM EVALUATION REPORT (97MAR16 – 98FEB27)]
980629:  DD Form 214 issued. Applicant discharged with a General, Under Honorable Conditions, by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.

[ADMIN DISCHARGE PACKAGE NOT CONTAINED IN THE SERVICE RECORD.]

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 19980629 with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (A). In the absence of a discharge package, the Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (B) and, after a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, found that the discharge was proper and equitable (C and D).

Issue 1. The Applicant states his discharge was based on one isolated incident in “7 years 8 months.” Despite a servicemember’s prior record of service, certain serious offenses, even though isolated, warrant separation from the naval service in order to maintain proper order and discipline. Regulations limit the Board’s review to a determination on the propriety and equity of the discharge. In the Applicant’s case, the Board could discern no impropriety or inequity and therefore consider his discharge proper and equitable. Relief denied.

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 97 until 29 March 2000, Article 1910-142 [formerly 3630605]. SEPARATION 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 | 2001_Navy | ND01-00571

    Original file (ND01-00571.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Decision A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 010928. 980501: Commander, Naval Base, Norfolk directed the applicant's discharge general (under honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense. Outstanding post-service conduct, 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, may be considered by the NDRB.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00396

    Original file (ND01-00396.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00396 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010212, requested that the characterization of service on the 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 Character reference dated June 23, 2000 Character reference dated April 29, 1999 Letter from Montclair State University dated December 10, 1999 Forty-three pages from...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00060

    Original file (ND01-00060.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Decision A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 010808. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, NDRB discerned no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the applicant’s service. Appeal denied 980819.980826: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01263

    Original file (ND03-01263.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. 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. At this time, the Applicant has not provided sufficient verifiable documentation of good character and conduct to mitigate his misconduct while on active duty.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00912

    Original file (ND04-00912.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND04-00912 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20040511. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. 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:

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00455

    Original file (ND02-00455.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:NAVPERS 1070/613, Administrative Remarks, Retention Warning, dtd 13Oct99 NAVPERS 1070/613, Administrative Remarks, NJP action, dtd 15Sep 99 Copy of DD Form 214. No indication of appeal in the record.991209: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due pattern of misconduct and due...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00534

    Original file (ND02-00534.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00534 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020213, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. The discharge is improper because part of the charges for captain's mast was adultery even though my wife and I were legally separated and living apart at the time. No indication of appeal in the record.000331: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00138

    Original file (ND02-00138.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00138 Applicant’s Request This application for discharge review, received 011022, requested that the characterization of service awarded to the Applicant upon his discharge be changed to honorable. The Applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. In submitting DD Form 293 Review of Discharge, I am requesting the board update my discharge to Honorable and change my reentry code to allow me to reenlist and continue serving my country.

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00411

    Original file (ND99-00411.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Issues Prior to the documentary discharge review, the applicant introduced no issues as block 8 on the DD Form 293 is blank. 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) 941217 - 941227 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 941228 Date of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00315

    Original file (ND02-00315.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00315 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020128, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. (Equity Issue) This former member proffers that personal problems, his youth and immaturity and being separated from his family, contributed to and sufficiently mitigated his misconduct of record to warrant upgrade of his character of service to General (Under Honorable Conditions)2. ...