Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00450
Original file (ND04-00450.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-HTFR, USN
Docket No. ND04-00450

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20040130. 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 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 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: 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 was in the Navy and got discharged with a re-entry code number 4. I would like to have this number upgraded to a 1, 2, or3.”

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)     010320 - 010530  COG
         Active: None

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 010531               Date of Discharge: 020821

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 01 01 17 (Does not include lost time)
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 18                          Years Contracted: 4 (12 months extension)

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 35

 Highest Rate: HTFN

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: NMF*                 Behavior: NMF             OTA: NMF

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: BER, AFEM

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: 32

*No Marks Found in the service record

 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 :

020604:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: UA, violation of UCMJ, Article 107: False official statements.
         Award: Forfeiture of $651.75, restriction and extra duty for 15 days. No indication of appeal in the record.
020604:  Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (awarded NJP), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

020619:  To UA.

020722:  From UA, to duty.

 020815:  Summary Court-Martial.
 Violation of UCMJ, Article 86: UA on 020619; violation of UCMJ, Article 87: Missed movement on 020715; violation of UCMJ, Article 90: Disobedience of a superior commissioned officer on 020610; violation of UCMJ, Article 134: Indecent acts with another on 020610.
         Sentence: Forfeiture of $737, reduction to HTFR, confinement for 21 days.

020815:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.
020815:  Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights.

020828:  Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.

021031:  COMPHIBGRU 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 20020821 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. T he Applicant’s service was marred by award of nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on one occasion and a summary court-martial on another occasion. 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. Relief denied.

Concerning a change in reenlistment code, 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. Normally, to permit relief, an inequity or impropriety must have existed during the period of enlistment in question. No such inequity or impropriety 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 | 2002_Navy | ND02-00073

    Original file (ND02-00073.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 (C and D).The NDRB notified the applicant in a letter dated 020220 that the discharge package was not available, and advised the applicant that his case would be held for thirty days to allow him to provide discharge documentation. The applicant did not provide the Board with discharge documentation or post service...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-01180

    Original file (ND01-01180.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 (Member 1 ane 4) Fifty-four pages from applicant's service records PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: USNR (DEP) 980311 - 980413 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 980414 Date of Discharge: 990426 Length of Service (years, months,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01215

    Original file (ND03-01215.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.020605: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.020605: Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights except the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00284

    Original file (ND02-00284.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I submit this application for a change in my discharge. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 Fifty-five pages from applicant's service record PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: None Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 960522 Date of Discharge: 980729 Length of Service (years,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00288

    Original file (ND02-00288.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00288 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020123, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. The Board found that the applicant’s medical care received during his tour on active duty and the applicant’s medical condition do not mitigate his misconduct sufficient to warrant an upgrade to his discharge. The applicant’s character notwithstanding his unauthorized absences and personality...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00831

    Original file (ND03-00831.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-00831 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030407. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Age at Entry: 23 Years Contracted: 4 Education Level: 12 AFQT: 43 Highest Rate: SN Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks): Performance: 2.67 (3) Behavior: 2.33 (3) OTA: 2.56 Military Decorations: None Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: BER (3), SSDR, AFEM, NDSM...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-01129

    Original file (ND99-01129.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    980924: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct as evidenced by violation of UCMJ Article 86 (Unauthorized Absence) on 2 April 1998, Article 86 (Unauthorized absence) and Article 87 (Missing Movement) on 18 June 1998, and Article 86 (Unauthorized absence) on 19 September 1998.980924: Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00902

    Original file (ND04-00902.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND04-00902 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20040512. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. 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 | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00770

    Original file (ND03-00770.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-00770 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030326. 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

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00067

    Original file (ND01-00067.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00067 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 001017, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. 980526: BUPERS directed the applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. In response to the applicant’s issues 1 and 2, the Board has no obligation to change the applicant’s discharge in order to allow him to get medical...