Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00048
Original file (ND04-00048.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-AR, USN
Docket No. ND04-00048

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20031007. 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 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 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. “Dear Sir/Madaam,

There’s an old saying that says, “You don’t know what you’ve got till it’s gone.” I’ve never understood that phrase until I made a poor choice by being discharged from the Navy. At the time, I thought I knew what I wanted from life and that the Navy didn’t need any part of that. I was wrong. Joining the Navy was the best choice I’ve ever made and I regret making the choice that I did to cause me to be discharged. I was immature and selfish and over the last 3 years have realized what’s really important in life. All I’ve ever wanted to do was and still is to serve my country. I allowed myself to be robbed of that incredible opportunity and I would like to ask for mercy and be given another chance to prove myself.

My life’s goal is to serve the United States Navy again to the best of my ability and beyond. Please consider my request, as I would like to be apart of the service again.”

Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Privacy Release Form
Character Reference Letter dated September 2, 2003
Character Reference Letter dated May 25, 2003
Character Reference Letter from Pastor, W_ R. D_, dated August 26, 2003
Copies from Service Record (83 pages)

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     970103 - 970925  COG
         Active: USN                        None

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 970926               Date of Discharge: 000316

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 02 05 20
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 19                          Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 12                        AFQT: NMA*

 Highest Rate: ABHAN

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: NMA                  Behavior: NMA             OTA: NMA

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: AFEM, MUC, SSDR

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: 158

*No Marks Available for review

 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 :

980219:  UA from 0700-1400, 980219.

980420:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence from unit on or about 980314 until 980316 (2 days).
         Award: Forfeiture of $463.00 pay per month for 1 month, restriction and extra duty for 45 days. No indication of appeal in the record.

980420:  Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (You were awarded CO’s NJP for violation of the UCMJ, Article 86, Unauthorized absence), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

981117:  UA from 0700-0715, 981117.

990519:  UA from USS ABRAHAM LINCOLN 990519-990520 (1 day/S).

000125:  Summary Court-Martial.
         Charge I: violation of the UCMJ, Article 86 (2 Specifications), Unauthorized absence, from on or about 990809 until his apprehension on or about 990912 (35 days/S), from on or about 990921 until on or about 000118 (120 days/S). Charge II: violation of the UCMJ, Article 87 (5 Specifications), on or about 991007, 991013, 991025, 991102, and 991122, missing ship’s movement.
         Finding: to Charge I and the specifications 1 and 2 thereunder, guilty. To Charge II and specification 1 through 5 thereunder, guilty.
         Sentence: Confinement for 20 days, reduced to E-1.
         CA action 000204: Sentence approved and ordered executed.
000204:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense and misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct, as evidenced by all punishments in your current enlistment and your summary court-martial of 000125.
000205:  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

000212:  Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense and misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.

000302:  COMCRUDESGRU THREE 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 20000316 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. 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 one occasion and one summary court-martial. 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 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 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. 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 only during the processing of a formal application for enlistment through a recruiter.

The Applicant’s discharge characterization accurately reflects his service to his country. 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), 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 | 2003_Navy | ND03-00834

    Original file (ND03-00834.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-00834 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030409. At this time, the Board determined that the documentation submitted by the Applicant does not mitigate his misconduct while on active duty. 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 | 2003_Navy | ND03-01208

    Original file (ND03-01208.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of 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 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 000320 - 000522 COG Active: USN None Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 000523 Date of Discharge:...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00416

    Original file (ND03-00416.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the 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 found that the discharge was proper and equitable (C and D).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. ...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00992

    Original file (ND04-00992.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. In the acknowledgement letter, the Applicant 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, and that all hearings are held in the Washington National Capital Region. The names, and votes of the members of the Board...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01234

    Original file (ND03-01234.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. 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. The names, and votes of the members of the Board are recorded on...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00370

    Original file (ND00-00370.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The discharge shall remain: UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/ PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-140 (formerly 3630600).The NDRB did note an administrative error on the original DD Form 214. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION The applicant’s issue 4 is a non-decisional issue for the Board.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00240

    Original file (ND04-00240.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged in absentia 20021205 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct (A). The Board does not automatically upgrade a discharge after six months.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00826

    Original file (ND03-00826.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00723

    Original file (ND01-00723.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The discharge shall remain: GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-140 (formerly 3630600). Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events : 971117: Commenced 48 months of active duty under the TAR program.981014: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Failure to obey a lawful general order or regulation on 980824. The names, and votes of the members of the Board are recorded on the original of this document and may be...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00638

    Original file (ND04-00638.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.010412: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.010412: Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ...