Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01396
Original file (ND03-01396.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-ENFR, USN
Docket No. ND03-01396

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20030821. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. 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 20040526. 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 – commission of a serious offense, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

 No issues were submitted by the Applicant.
Documentation

In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
DD Form 149
Letter to Applicant from Board for Correction of Naval Records, dated August 6, 2003

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     910322 - 910501  COG
         Active: None

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 910502               Date of Discharge: 920218

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 00 09 17
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 19                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 36

 Highest Rate: ENFR

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: NMA*        Behavior: NMA             OTA : NMA

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

*No marks assigned.

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/Misconduct – commission of a serious offense, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

911107:  Applicant diagnosed as psychologically and physically dependent on alcohol. Applicant accepted Level III treatment.

911211:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92 (2 specs): (1) Fail to obey lawful order, to wit: wrongfully possessing an Armed Forces identification card not his own on 911117, (2) Consuming an alcoholic beverage under age 21 years on 911117, violation of UCMJ, Article 134: Disorderly conduct on 911117.
         Award: Forfeiture of $376 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days. No indication of appeal in the record.
911211:  Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (Poor military performance, by wrongfully consuming an alcoholic beverage under the age of 21 years, and wrongfully possessing an Armed Forces identification card not his own.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

911219:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 91: Disrespectful in language toward a superior petty officer on 911218, by saying to him “Fuck Off”, violation of UCMJ, Article 92 (2 specs): (1) Wrongfully consuming alcohol under the age of 21 on 911218, (2) Wrongfully consuming alcohol while in a restricted status on 911218.
         Award: Forfeiture of $376 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days. No indication of appeal in the record.
911223:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.
911223:  Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights.
911226:  Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.

920128:  BUPERS directed the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 19920218 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (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).

 The Applicant states that he was told that after six months he could have his discharge upgraded. There is no law or regulation that authorizes a discharge to be automatically upgraded after six months. In the Applicant’s case, the Board could discern no impropriety or inequity and therefore considered the Applicant’s discharge proper and equitable. A characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions is warranted when the service member’s conduct constitutes a significant departure from that expected of a Sailor. The Applicant’s service record is marred by award of nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on two separate occasions to include violating UCMJ, Articles 91 and 92 thus substantiating the misconduct . The Applicant’s summary of service clearly reflects the Applicant ’ s disobedience of the orders and directives that regulate good order and discipline in the naval service, and demonstrated he was unsuitable for further service. An upgrade to general (under honorable conditions) 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, documentation of community service, and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities, are examples of verifiable documents that should be provided to receive consideration for relief, based on post-service conduct. At this time, the Applicant has not provided sufficient verifiable documentation of good character and conduct to mitigate his misconduct while on active duty. 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), effective 15 Aug 91 until
04 Mar 93, Article 3630600, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL 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 | 2000_Navy | ND00-00510

    Original file (ND00-00510.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    No indication of appeal in the record.910901: [USS MOUNT WHITNEY (LCC-20)] notified applicant of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct an misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense [EXTRACTED FROM CO'S MESSAGE]. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 911220 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to a...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00745

    Original file (ND02-00745.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    My father, S_ F_ SR. was diagnosed with renal failure in 3/91 and soon after put on a kidney transplant donor list. 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).The Applicant states he commenced his period of unauthorized absence to assist his father. Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)A.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00582

    Original file (ND02-00582.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00582 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020402, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. It is recommended that ENFR H_ (Applicant) receive a General discharge. 940420: BUPERS directed the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-01265

    Original file (ND02-01265.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. Award: Forfeiture of $393 per month for 2 months, reduction to SR. No indication of appeal in the record.920115: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense as evidenced by...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00219

    Original file (ND03-00219.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. No indication of appeal in the record.000225: Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct commission of serious offense as evidenced by all punishments under the UCMJ during the current enlistment and misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct as evidenced by all punishments under the UCMJ during the current enlistment.000229: Commander, Amphibious Group TWO authorized...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00802

    Original file (ND03-00802.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. The NDRB also advised that the board first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing. 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.

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00021

    Original file (ND99-00021.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 (D and E).In the applicant’s issue 1, the Board found this issue to be without merit. In the applicant’s issues 2 and 3, the Board found these issues to be without merit. You may obtain a copy of DoD Directive 1332.28 by writing to: DA Military Review Boards Agency Management Information and Support Directorate Armed Forces...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00945

    Original file (ND99-00945.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Age at Entry: 22 Years Contracted: 4 Education Level: 12 AFQT: 50 Highest Rate: FR 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: 52 Character, Narrative Reason, and Authority of Discharge (at time of issuance):UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/Misconduct – commission of a serious offense, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600. No...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00934

    Original file (ND00-00934.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper but inequitable (D and E).In response to the applicant’s issue, the Board thoroughly reviewed the applicant’s service record, NJP’s, and performance evaluation average. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of characterization to general (under honorable conditions). Outstanding post-service conduct, to...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00752

    Original file (ND03-00752.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-00752 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030328. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. 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