Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00082
Original file (ND04-00082.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-SR, USN
Docket No. ND04-00082

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20031017. 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 did not list any 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 DC 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 20040712. 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: 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

 1. “In the attempt to better my life, Sir, I am in need of something that only you can handle. My re-enlistment code is an R-4, which is the Enlistment code for an Other Than Honorable Separation. Now that I’m out of the Navy, I’ve had a chance to experience life on a whole different level. Nothing has worked out from the day I got out of the Military. A good job is hard to find and a career is even harder to start.

Sir, I have written a detailed letter describing the terms on which I received an Other Than Honorable Separation and ask that you, if possible, raise my enlistment code to, at least, a General Discharge. My goal is to go to further my education here using the Montgomery G.I. Bill, also looking into going back into the Military as a reservists, but just the fact of knowing that I can't is holding me back from being the things I know I could be. This is something that I am in need of.”

2. “On, around, or about April 5th, I, Seaman A_, K_ J_, (Applicant) was given Special Liberty for three days for the 6th, 7th, and 8th of April. As my Special Liberty chit was being approved, by the time it got up my Lieutenant, I was given permission to leave by him, my LT. So I left, did what order of business I was able to do and came back. Now, I was a day late coming back on the 9th, but I did call and let them know that I almost ran off the road, sleep driving. Before I left, I went to Pensacola N.A.S. and rented a car, 2000 Honda Accord. (This info will come into place later). I rented the car not knowing I would be late coming back, but things do happen. The order of business for those three days was taking a friend of mine to her new duty station, only because she had no money and lots of excess baggage and due to that, I offered to help out and my chain of command clearly understood that so they let me go. But when I got back, my Commander, even though approving the chit, said I shouldn’t have left without having his consent or signature on the chit.

So, when the Captain (N_) saw that I was down as U.A., he came, personally, to my office and talked to me. After explaining to him my side, he understood, because, as an E-2, I would stay maybe 5 to 6 hours after close of business to catch up on work for him, my ships secretary and my Admin Officer, not including my own offices work, I am a hard worker and I loved the job I did in the Navy, but after even this misunderstanding. I still had to go to Captains Mast. So I was sentenced to 45/45 restriction and half months pay for 2 months. The Captain, needless to say, was for the most part, very disappointed. Mainly, he was disappointed that when I got back or the 9th, I didn’t check in with my chain of command, but that’s only because I really didn’t know any better, considering I’ve never been in trouble before. But, not only that, I was asked if I wanted to leave the navy or better yet “give up on the Navy” because I had got in trouble for the first time in my life and of course, I said Yes. I thought at the time that it was not right for me to be in trouble for something I had no control over in the first place. Then, on the 18th of April, I stood trial again for being late to two of my restriction musters on the 14th and 17th of April which brought my Separation down from an Administration Separation to an Other Than Honorable Separation and I feel that was inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident in 15 months of service with no other adverse action. But now that I’m finally out and have had a chance to think about things, the Navy, through all its experiences helped me to grow and realize that things do happen and that’s why I’m asking for another chance to live a normal life.

My goal is to enlist into the Army National Guard or the Naval Reserves and go to College here in Illinois. I really want to be able to use my benefits and further my education in Business Administration. I already have schools I am looking to go to but I can’t get approved for anything because of my Reenlistment code being so low. Most Colleges are saying that since I was in the Military that I can use my Montgomery G. I. Bill money, but since I can’t, I have to keep telling them that I won’t use it, to let’s try another way of paying for college, but when they try to get me scholarships or grants, I still need proof that I have the right enlistment code or discharge. I don’t know if you’ve been out into the civilian world, back- and- forth, but when you get back into the civilian world and try to live on your own means, trying to convert your mind back into the swing of things, its harder and harder by the day, you don’t know where to start and nobody wants to help. My resume has been out in the Chicago area for the past three months and I just got a call back for Target working as security, checking receipts, and I know we all have to start somewhere, but this is not what I plan to do for the rest of my life.

And before, I forget, this is why I said “yes” to getting out. I felt I was kind of, for lack of a better word, screwed around. I had been in a leadership position since the first day I was in Basic Training as an R.C.P.O. and in my training school as a “Platoon Leader Blue Rope” and even as Top Seaman, on the USS Iwo Jima LHD-7, for a while. I had no intention of discharging this way. My original plan was to make this out of an career and that’s what I still want to accomplish.

About the car, just when they, the Master At Arms, were walking me through the gate, I saw 2 police cars to take me to jail, which I stayed in for 7days until Pensacola Police Department came and got me. Just to find out that the MAA that promised me to bring the car back,, didn’t bring it back for 8 days after my first Captains mast. The owner of the Rental Company had sent out a warrant for my arrest cause the car was due back on the 9th of April, cause on the 8th of April, I extended for an extra day and when they told me I was in U.A. status, I gave the money for that extra day to the MAA’s to give to the Rental place so I wouldn’t be in debt to them. Now, after 2 court dates I am on Probation for a year as of the 7th of August because of that incident.

Please note, I have no grief against the Navy and I really need another chance to prove to myself and my family that I can accomplish something in life, even if it means starting all over from Basic Training.”


 Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Letter from Applicant, undated
Statement, unsigned (2 pages)
Applicant’s DD Form 214
Written statement from Applicant, undated

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     991022 - 991215  COG
         Active: None

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 991216               Date of Discharge: 010510

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 01 04 25
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 18                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 56

 Highest Rate: YNSA

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 1.00 (1)    Behavior: 1.00 (1)                OTA: 1.00

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: None

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: 4

 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 :

010119:  NJP this date [No further information available].

010209:  NJP this date [No further information available].

010413:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86 (2 specs): (1) Unauthorized absence from 0700, 010405 to 1300, 010406 (1 day/surrendered), (2) Unauthorized absence from 0700, 010407 to 1900, 010410 (3 days/apprehended).
         Award: Forfeiture of $502.80 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days. No indication of appeal in the record.

010418:  NJP this date [No further informational available].
010418:  Applicant found fit for confinement on bread and water for 3 days.

 010504:  Commander, Amphibious Group TWO directed the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.

010510:  Evaluation Report: Seaman Recruit A_ has been an administrative burden since reporting aboard. He has been awarded Commanding Officer’s NJP five times during this reporting period.

010510:  DD Form 214: Applicant discharged under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-140.

Discharge package not available.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 20010510 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct (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 available records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, found that the discharge was proper and equitable (C and D).

Issues 1-2. 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. While the Applicant contends that his discharge was based on one isolated instance in “15 months,” the Applicant’s service was marred by at least four nonjudicial punishment proceedings for violations of the UCMJ. 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.

Concerning reenlistment, the NDRB has no authority to change reenlistment codes or make recommendations to permit reentry into the naval service or any other of the Armed Forces. The NDRB has no jurisdiction over reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Navy or Marine Corps. Reenlistment policy of the naval service is promulgated by the Commander, Navy Recruiting Command, 5722 Integrity Drive, Bldg 784, Millington, TN 38054. Neither a less than fully honorable discharge nor an unfavorable "RE" code is, in itself, a bar to reenlistment. A request for a waiver is normally done only during the processing of a formal application for enlistment through a recruiter.

The Veterans Administration determines eligibility for post-service benefits not the Navy Discharge Review Board. There is no requirement or law that grants recharacterization solely on the issue of obtaining Veterans' benefits and this issue does not serve to provide a foundation upon which the Board can grant relief. Additionally, the Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational opportunities. Regulations limit the Board’s review to a determination on the propriety and equity of the discharge.

The following is provided for the edification of the Applicant. Normally, to permit relief, a procedural error or inequity must have occurred during the discharge process for the period of enlistment in question. The Board discovered no such errors after a review of Applicant’s case. 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 naval service. The NDRB is authorized, however, to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge to the extent such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review. Examples of documentation that should be provided to the Board include proof of educational pursuits, verifiable employment records, documentation of community service and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities. As of this time, the Applicant has not provided any documentation for the Board to consider. Therefore, no relief is appropriate.

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 | 2003_Navy | ND03-00576

    Original file (ND03-00576.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-00576 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030221. I went to his office and he informed me that I was AWOL for a day and would be going to NJP. I ask you to give me back my life and allow me to right the wrong decisions I have made.”Additional issues submitted by Applicant’s counsel/representative (American Legion):

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00043

    Original file (ND99-00043.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND99-00043 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 981006, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed general/under honorable conditions. Now that I was out of school and had report chits I was informed that my command would send me to the brig because of these chits. Violation of UCMJ, Article 112a (2 specs): Use and possession of marijuana on 20 July 1997.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-01182

    Original file (ND04-01182.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 Letter from Applicant, undated Service Record Documents, annotated by Applicant, 26 Apr 02 (3 pages) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 000929 -...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00751

    Original file (ND02-00751.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00751 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020430, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. One of those people for an example was the Master Chief of the command. When all came down after the two NJP's this new Senior Chief had convinced the new Maintenance Officer and new Assistant Maintenance Officer, the new Division Officer for the Line Division, and the new Maintenance Master Chief that had not been...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00744

    Original file (ND01-00744.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00744 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010508, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to Honorable. Petty officer W_ comes to the ship and good things go bad again. But when the change of our petty officers and chiefs happened he got a position of power.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00859

    Original file (ND02-00859.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant also requested a documentary record discharge review. I am very sorry for using drug in the U.S. Armed forces but after been discharge from the Navy I return home and by the grace of God I got me self together I have been off drug for 13 years. Evidence of continuing educational pursuits, a positive employment record, documentation of community service, certification of non-involvement with civil authorities and credible evidence that the Applicant is living a drug free life...

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00513

    Original file (MD02-00513.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD02-00513 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020305, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION 870220: GCMCA [Commanding General, Marine Corps Base, Camp Pendleton, CA] determined that Applicant had no potential for further service, that separation in lieu of trial by court-martial was in the best interest of the service, and directed discharge under conditions...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01250

    Original file (ND03-01250.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. I then decided to extend my tour of duty for another two years to NALF San Clemente, which was the closest duty station to San Diego where I decided to complete my schooling. Not too long after I arrived in San Diego we found out that Alma was pregnant, but three months after, she called again with a bad news, she had a miscarriage.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00608

    Original file (ND02-00608.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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): Active: USN None Inactive: USNR (DEP) 990827 - 991122 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 991123 Date of Discharge: 010606 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 01 06 14 Inactive: None 010504: COMCARGRU SEVEN authorized the Applicant's...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500374

    Original file (ND0500374.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. “I feel the Under Other Than Honorable Discharge was inequitable because I was having numerous personal problems which needed to be addressed with counseling. She was also in the NAVY as well at the time.