Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00705
Original file (ND04-00705.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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




ex-MSSR, USN
Docket No. ND04-00705

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20040324. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. 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 20041029. 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)/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, MSSR M_, apologize for my actions in the United States Navy. I feel my actions were childish and selfish and resulted in my discharge. However, I am now a civilian and also a 22 year old adult. I’m in school working on an associates degree and currently employed. I’ve grown up a lot since being in the service and would like my discharge upgraded.”


Documentation

In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:

Copy of DD Form 214 (-1 and –4)


PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):

         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     990622 - 990920  COG
         Active: None

Period of Service Under Review :

Date of Enlistment: 990921               Date of Discharge: 020109

Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 02 03 19
         Inactive: None

Age at Entry: 18                          Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 32

Highest Rate: MSSN

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance: 1.50 (2)    Behavior: 1.50 (2)                OTA: 1.92

Military Decorations: None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: SSDR

Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

Character, Narrative Reason, and Authority of Discharge (at time of issuance):

GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-140 (formerly 3630600).

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

001005:  Counseling: Advised of deficiency (Derelict in the performance of duty to keep barracks room clean enough to pass inspection), notified of corrective actions and assistance available.

010620:  NJP held this date. No other information found.

010620:  Counseling: Advised of deficiency (Making and uttering worthless checks by dishonorably failing to maintain funds), notified of corrective actions and assistance available.

011206:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92, disobey a lawful order. No other information found.

No discharge package


PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 20020109 with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) for misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct (A). After a thorough review of the available records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper and equitable (B and C). The presumption of regularity of governmental affairs was applied by the Board in this case in the absence of a complete discharge package (D).

Issue 1. 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. However, the NDRB is authorized to consider outstanding post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge, to the extent that such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the Applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review. Verifiable proof of any post-service accomplishments must be provided in order for the Applicant to claim post-service conduct and behavior as a reason to upgrade a less than honorable discharge. Evidence of continuing educational pursuits, employment record, documentation of community service, certification of non-involvement with civil authorities and credible evidence of a substance free lifestyle, are examples of verifiable documentation that may be provided to receive consideration for relief, based on post-service conduct. The Applicant’s evidence of post-service conduct was found not to mitigate his misconduct sufficient to warrant an upgrade to his discharge. 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 9, paragraph 9.2, PROPRIETY OF THE DISCHARGE.

C. 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.


D. 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.


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 | ND03-01041

    Original file (ND03-01041.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The NDRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge, is authorized to change the character of service and/or the reason for discharge if such change is warranted. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00612

    Original file (ND03-00612.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-00612 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030226. 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, no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the Applicant’s service was discovered by the NDRB.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01120

    Original file (ND03-01120.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After reviewing the Applicant's service record, the Board found that the characterization of the Applicant's discharge as other than honorable was proper and equitable. You should read Enclosure (5) of the Directive before submitting such a complaint. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00601

    Original file (ND01-00601.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. Relief based on this issue is denied. Issue 10. the applicant states, “I tried to apply for a compassionate reassignment but was unfairly denied or told to forget it.” There is nothing in the record to support this issue nor did the applicant provide documentary evidence to support this issue.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00929

    Original file (ND01-00929.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 991027 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct (A). However, the NDRB is authorized to consider outstanding post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge, to the extent that such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review. The...

  • 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 | 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 | ND03-01104

    Original file (ND03-01104.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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

  • 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 | ND01-00832

    Original file (ND01-00832.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. 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) 970324 - 970819 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 970820 Date of Discharge: 000929 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active:...