Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00416
Original file (ND04-00416.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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


ex-AZAA, USN
Docket No. ND04-00416

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20040114. 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. The Applicant did not designate a representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20040910. 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: GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/COMPLETION OF REQUIRED ACTIVE SERVICE, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-104.






PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION


Issues, as stated

 Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:
1. “I feel that I completed my service fulfilled my four year commitment, and believe that I am entitled to all of my benefits.”
Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
DD Form 214 (3 copies)

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     990629 - 990711  COG
          Active: None
Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 990712               Date of Discharge: 030711
Length of Service (years, months, days):
         Active: 04 00 00
         Inactive: None
Age at Entry: 20                          Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 10-GED           AFQT: 47
Highest Rate: AZAN

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):
Performance: 2.63 (8)    Behavior: 1.67 (9)                OTA: 2.31

 Military Decorations: None
Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: Navy “E” Ribbon, NDSM, SSDR

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: None
Character, Narrative Reason, and Authority of Discharge (at time of issuance):

GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/COMPLETION OF REQUIRED ACTIVE SERVICE, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-104.
Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

000725:  Counseled for failing the run portion of the Physical Readiness Test (PRT), notified of corrective actions and assistance available. Further advised of the consequences for failure of a first or second PFT in a four - year period.
010503:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 91: Willful disobedience of a petty officer; violation of UCMJ Article 117: Provoking speeches and gestures.
         Award: Restriction for 30 days, reduction to E-2 (suspended 6 months). No indication of appeal in the record.

 010815:  Punishment of reduction to E-2 suspended at NJP of 01May03 vacated due to continued misconduct.

010822:  NJP for violation of UCMJ Article 91: Willful disobedience of a Petty Officer; violation of UCMJ Article 117: Provoking speeches and gestures; Article 86: Unauthorized absence.
         Award: Correctional custody for 30 days, oral reprimand, reduction to
E-1 (suspended for 60 days). No indication of appeal in the record.
010822:  Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (Article 86 (UA), Article 91 (Disrespect to a Petty Officer), and Article 117 (Provoking speech and gestures), which are prejudice to good order and discipline in the armed forces and are of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

030307:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Absent without leave; violation of UCMJ Article 91: Insubordinate conduct toward a Petty Officer; violation of UCMJ Article 92: Failure to obey an order.
         Award: Forfeiture of $764.40 pay per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 60 days, reduction to E-2. No indication of appeal in the record.
030307:  Recommendation for advancement to AZ3 withdrawn due to unsatisfactory performance for the period 02JUL16 TO 03FEB28.

 030711:  Discharged at the expiration of enlistment with a General (Under Honorable Condition) by reason of completion of required active service.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 20030711 with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of completion of required active service due to expiration of enlistment (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: The Applicant contends that he completed his service, fulfilled his four-year commitment, and believes he is entitled to all of his benefits, thus an upgrade of his discharge to honorable. When the service of a member of the U.S. Navy has been honest and faithful, it is appropriate to characterize that service as honorable. A General (Under 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. The Applicant’s service was marred by three nonjudicial punishment proceedings for violations of Articles 86, 91, 92 and 117 of the UCMJ. Additionally, the Applicant’s performance and behavior marks were below the standard required for an honorable discharge. 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 characterization of service. An upgrade to honorable would be inappropriate. Relief is denied.

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 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 . The Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), re-issued October 2002, effective 22 Aug 02 until Present, Article 1910-104 (previously 3620150), SEPARATION BY REASON OF EXPIRATION OF ACTIVE OBLIGATED SERVICE (EAOS) .

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 | ND01-01178

    Original file (ND01-01178.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB also advised that the board first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing. No indication of appeal in the record.950511: Applicant to unauthorized absence 0715, 11May95.950509: USS SAVANNAH (AOR 4) notified applicant of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse, a pattern of misconduct, and commission of a serious offense.950510: Applicant advised of his rights and having...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00107

    Original file (ND02-00107.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The discharge shall change to: UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL)/Misconduct- commission of a serious offense, authority: NAVMILSPERSMAN, Article 3630600.A personal appearance discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on XXXXXX. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 870529 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense (A). However, the Board found that the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01510

    Original file (ND03-01510.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). “I’m writing this letter in regard to an upgrade in my discharge I received, my behavior in the military was not good but I was going through some thing, but I managed to stay clear of anything close to that behavior since getting out including no criminal record, and now I attend a good bible-based church to get my life all the way right, so...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-01213

    Original file (ND99-01213.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I received awards and decorations and so warrants an upgrade to honorable. No indication of appeal in the record.930507: USS ANCHORAGE (LSD 36) 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 one NJP conviction for Violation of the UCMJ, Art.111 - Drunken or reckless driving; one NJP conviction for Violation of the UCMJ, Art. In response to applicant’s issue 3, the Naval...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-01213 (5)

    Original file (ND99-01213 (5).rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I received awards and decorations and so warrants an upgrade to honorable. No indication of appeal in the record.930507: USS ANCHORAGE (LSD 36) 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 one NJP conviction for Violation of the UCMJ, Art.111 - Drunken or reckless driving; one NJP conviction for Violation of the UCMJ, Art. In response to applicant’s issue 3, the Naval...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00612

    Original file (ND04-00612.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The discharge shall remain: UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600. I was young and the recruiter made a deal with me, that cost me my life. Commanding Officer’s comments: SR F_ (Applicant) has been extremely inconsistent since reporting on board in April of last year.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00198

    Original file (MD04-00198.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD04-00198 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20031117. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Violation of UCMJ, Article 92: did disobey a lawful order from 1stSgt T_.Awd red to E-1 and 45 days restriction and extra duties.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00412

    Original file (ND04-00412.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. _______________________________________________________________________ In accordance with 32 C.F.R., section 724.166, and SECNAVINST 5420.174C, enclosure (1), paragraph 1.16, The American Legion submits to the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB or Board) the above issue and following statement in supplement to the Applicant’s...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-01295

    Original file (ND02-01295.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    870917: CNMPC directed the applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. At this time, the Applicant has not provided any verifiable documentation of good character and conduct to mitigate his misconduct while on active duty. 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:...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600702

    Original file (ND0600702.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. I have learned to control my anger and better myself.”The Applicant is requesting a discharge upgrade based on equity regarding the character of discharge. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged on 20050705 by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct (A and B) with a service characterization of...