Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00036
Original file (ND04-00036.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-ENFN, USN
Docket No. ND04-00036

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20031001. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. The Applicant requests a personal appearance discharge review before a traveling panel closest to (left blank). The Applicant listed the Disabled American Veterans as the 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. The NDRB also advised that the Board first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20040715. 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. “I am writing this because I was rushed out of the Navy so quick that I never even got to see any legal representation to defend my rights. Second after serving one enlistment I don’t think I deserve a other than honorable discharge.”

Additional issues submitted by Applicant’s representative (Disabled American Veterans):

2. “Dear Chairperson:After a review of the Former Service Members (FSM) DD Form 293 Application for the Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the Armed Forces of the United States and all of evidence assembled for review, we continue to note the contention of the appellant in his request for a discharge upgrade of his current Under Other Than Honorable.The FSM served on active service from 10/12/97 to 1/24/03 at which time he was discharged due to Pattern of Misconduct. The FSM contends the current discharge is improper because he was never given legal counsel prior to discharge.This creates a need for a review of the application of the standard, for the Board to determine that the Applicant’s discharge was improper. The Board will determine which reason for discharge should have been assigned based upon the facts and circumstances before the Board, including the service regulations governing the reasons for discharge at that time, to determine whether relief is warranted. See, SECNAVIST 5420.174 (c), Par. (f) (1).As the representative, we ask that consideration be given to equitable relief, as this is a matter that involves a determination whether a discharge should be changed under the equity standards, to include any issue upon which the Applicant submits to the Board’s discretionary authority, under SECNAVIST 5420.174C.We ask for the Board’s careful and sympathetic consideration of all the evidence of record used in rendering a fair and impartial decision.

These issues do not supersede any issues previously submitted by the Applicant.Respectfully,”


 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)     970512 - 970925  COG
         Active: USN                        970926 - 011120  HON

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 011121               Date of Discharge: 030124

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 01 02 04
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 23                          Years Contracted: 5

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 39

 Highest Rate: EN3

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.00 (3)    Behavior: 2.33 (3)                OTA: 2.82

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM, SSDR

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: 18

 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 :

011121:  Applicant reenlisted for 5 years.

020316:  Applicant to unauthorized absence 0715-0950, 020316.

 020516:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Absence without leave on 0715-1008, 020429.
         Award: Restriction and extra duty for 15 days, reduction to ENFN. Reduction suspended for 6 months. No indication of appeal in the record.
020516:  Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (Unauthorized absence), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

020925:  Counseling and Assistance Center, Corpus Christi, TX. Applicant meets criteria for alcohol dependence. Recommend Level III treatment.

030106:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86 (3 specs): (1) Absence without leave on 0715-1000, 020802, (2) Absence without leave on 0715-1005, 020928, (3) Absence without leave on 0715, 021220 to 1932, 030105 (15 days/apprehended); violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Disobeyed lawful order to return to the ship from UA status on 021220.
         Award: Reduction to ENFN. Special court-martial No indication of appeal in the record.
030106:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.
030106:  Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights.
030106:  Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.

030107:  Applicant to unauthorized absence 0600, 030107.

030107:  Applicant missed ship’s movement.

030108:  Applicant missed ship’s movement.

030110:  Applicant from unauthorized absence 1230, 030110 (3 days/surrendered).

030115:  Commander, Mine Warfare Command 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 20030124 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).

 Issues 1 and 2. A characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions is warranted when the member's conduct constitutes a significant departure from that expected of a sailor. The Applicant’s service was marred by award of nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on two occasions. The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, reflects his disobedience of the orders and directives which regulate good order and discipline in the naval service, and falls short of that required for an honorable or under honorable (general) characterization of service. The Applicant claims that he was improperly denied legal representation regarding his administrative separation. However, the record clearly shows that the Applicant waived his right to consult with counsel. The evidence of record does not demonstrate that the Applicant was not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions. Relief denied.
The Applicant’s discharge characterization accurately reflects his service to his country for the enlistment under review. The discharge was proper and equitable. Normally, to permit relief, an error or inequity must have existed during the period of enlistment in question. No such error or inequity is evident during the Applicant’s enlistment. Additionally, 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. Relief not warranted.

The Applicant is reminded that he remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received at the NDRB within 15 years from the date of his discharge. 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), re-issued October 2002, effective 22 Aug 2002 until Present, 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 | 2003_Navy | ND03-00902

    Original file (ND03-00902.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board will determine which reason for discharge should have been assigned based upon the facts and circumstances before the Board, including the service regulations governing the reasons for discharge at that time, to determine whether relief is warranted. As the representative, we ask that consideration be given to equitable relief, as this is a matter that involves a determination whether a discharge should be changed under the equity standards, to include any issue upon which the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00111

    Original file (ND02-00111.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    (Equity Issue) This former member opines that his post service conduct has been sufficiently creditable to warrant the Board’s clemency relief as authorized under provisions of SECNAVINST 5420.174C, enclosure (1), paragraph 9.3. 861003: Vacate reduction to ENFN awarded at CO's NJP dated 7Aug86 due to continued misconduct. It is recommended that he be discharged with other than honorable discharge.861115: CNMPC directed the applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00906

    Original file (ND01-00906.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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) 970919 - 971112 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 971122 Date of Discharge: 000920 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 02 08 15 Inactive: 00 01 23 No indication of appeal in the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00803

    Original file (ND03-00803.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. No indication of appeal in the record.960510: USS CARL VINSON (CVN 70) 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 his 4 nonjudicial punishments imposed on 940715, 960218, 960325 and 960507 during his current...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-01065

    Original file (ND01-01065.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-01065 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010810, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00504

    Original file (ND04-00504.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    “Dear Chairperson:After a review of the Former Service Members (FSM) DD Form 293 Application for the Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the Armed Forces of the United States and all evidence assembled for review, we continue to note the contention of the appellant in his request for a discharge upgrade of his current General Under Honorable Conditions discharge to that of Honorable.The FSM served on active service from October 1, 1996 to November 24, 1998 at which time he was discharged...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00653

    Original file (ND00-00653.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00653 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000427, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 Statement from applicant dated May 9, 2000 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00763

    Original file (ND02-00763.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    As the representative, we ask that consideration be given to equitable relief, as this is a matter that involves a determination whether a discharge should be changed under the equity standards, to include any issue upon which the Applicant submits to the Board's discretionary authority, under SECNAVIST 5420.174C. 981030: Chief of Naval Air Training directed discharge general (under honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.Discharge package missing from...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00950

    Original file (ND03-00950.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. As the FSM has not submitted any documentation in support of his claim, we as the representative, ask that consideration be given to equitable relief, as this is a matter that involves a determination whether a discharge should be changed under the equity standards, to include any issue upon which the Applicant submits to the Board’s discretionary authority, under SECNAVIST...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00640

    Original file (ND99-00640.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    My discharge was improper because it was based on 8 days of time lost during my 3 years 1 month 21 days of service with no other adverse action. 841015: Surrendered on board at 0715 (3 days). No indication of appeal in the record.841101: Retention Warning from USS CANOPUS: Advised of deficiency (violation of UCMJ Article 92 - disobeying a lawful order, disrespect to a petty officer and failure to obey order/regulation), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of...