Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-01367
Original file (ND04-01367.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-EMFA, USN
Docket No. ND04-01367

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20040902. 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 list any representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20050304. 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

 Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

1. “My discharge was inequitable because it was based on an incident while my wife was sick and had to hospitalized with no other adverse action.”

 Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Applicant’s DD Form 214

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     940401 - 940405  COG
         Active: None

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 940406               Date of Discharge: 980426

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 04 00 21                  [Does not exclude lost time]
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 19                          Years Contracted: 4 (9 month extension)

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 59

 Highest Rate: EMFN

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.80 (1)    Behavior: 3.80 (1)                OTA: 3.80        (4.0 evals)
 Performance: 3.00 (2)    Behavior: 3.00 (2)                OTA: 3.09        (5.0 evals)

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM, BER (2)

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: 76

 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 :

960509:  Applicant extended enlistment for 9 months.

970525:  Applicant to unauthorized absence.

970611:  Applicant from unauthorized absence.

 970821:  Applicant to unauthorized absence.

 970828:  Applicant from unauthorized absence. Applicant’s EAOS changed to 980428.
970902:  Applicant to unauthorized absence.
970903:  Applicant from unauthorized absence. Applicant’s EAOS changed to 980429.
971006:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86 (3 specs): (1) Unauthorized absence from 0630, 970902 to 0630, 970903, (2) Unauthorized absence from 970821 to 970828, (3) Unauthorized absence from 970525 to 970611, violation of UCMJ, Article 134: Larceny on 971004.
         Award: Forfeiture of $540 per month for 1 month, restriction and extra duty for 30 days, reduction to E-2. No indication of appeal in the record.
971203   Applicant to unauthorized absence.

 971203:  Applicant missed movement.

 971222:  Applicant from unauthorized absence. Applicant’s EAOS changed to 980519.

980217:  Applicant in unauthorized absence from 0630 to 1300.

980218:  Applicant to unauthorized absence.

980220:  Applicant from unauthorized absence.
980226:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86 (3 specs): (1) Unauthorized absence from 0500, 971203 to 0900, 971222, (2) Unauthorized absence 0630-1300, 980217, (3) Unauthorized absence from 0630, 980218 to 1030, 980220, violation of UCMJ, Article 87: Missing ship’s movement on 971203.
         Award: Forfeiture of $250 per month for 1 month, restriction and extra duty for 40 days. No indication of appeal in the record.
980309:  Applicant to unauthorized absence.

980316:  Applicant missed movement.

 980401:  Applicant from unauthorized absence. Applicant’s EAOS changed to 980610.
980402:  Summary Court-Martial.
         Charge I: violation of the UCMJ, Article 86:
         Specification: Unauthorized absence from 980306 to 980401.
         Charge II: violation of the UCMJ, Article 87:
         Specification: Missing ship’s movement on 980316.
         Charge III: violation of the UCMJ, Article 134:
         Specification: Breaking restriction on 980306.
          Finding: to Charge I, II, and III and the specifications thereunder, guilty.
          Sentence: Confinement for 30 days, reduced to E-1.
         CA action 980415: Sentence approved and ordered executed, subject to the following: Clemency is granted, to terminate confinement on 980415. The Accused did not submit a request for clemency.

980426:  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.

 Applicant’s discharge package not contained in service record.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 19980426 under other than honorable conditions by reason of 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 contends that his discharge was inequitable because it was based on “an incident while my wife was sick and had to be hospitalized with no other adverse action.” 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. The Applicant’s service was marred by two nonjudicial punishment proceedings for violations of Articles 86, 87 and 134 of the UCMJ. The Applicant was also convicted at court-martial for violating Articles 86, 87 and 134 of the UCMJ. The Applicant committed seven violations of Article 86 with a total of 76 days of unauthorized absence. 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. While he may feel that his wife’s medical condition was the underlying cause of his misconduct, the record clearly reflects his willful misconduct and demonstrated he was unfit for further service. The evidence of record did not show that the Applicant was either not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions. Relief denied.

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. 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 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part V, Para 502, Propriety.

C. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part V, Para 503, Equity.

D. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part II, 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 “ http://Boards.law.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:

                  Secretary of the Navy Council of Review Boards
                   Attn: Naval Discharge Review Board
                   720 Kennon Street SE Rm 309
                  Washington Navy Yard DC 20374-5023

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00131

    Original file (ND02-00131.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00131 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 011018, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Applicant's letter to the Board dtd 01AUG06 Copy of DD Form 214 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: USNR...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00262

    Original file (ND03-00262.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Also my division officer recommended retention instead of separation.”Applicant marked the box "I HAVE LISTED ADDITIONAL ISSUES AS AN ATTACHMENT TO THIS APPLICATION." At this time, the applicant has not provided any documentation for the Board to consider. Therefore, no relief will be granted.The applicant is reminded that he is eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of his discharge.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00413

    Original file (ND04-00413.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :960708: Applicant to unauthorized absence 0700, 960708.960808: Applicant from unauthorized absence 0800, 960808 (30 days/surrendered). At this time, the Applicant has not provided sufficient verifiable documentation of good character and conduct to mitigate his misconduct while on active duty.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01156

    Original file (ND03-01156.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-01156 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030625. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The Applicant’s statements and documents provided contend he was required to attend to his wife’s condition and could therefore not deploy.

  • USMC | DRB | 1999_Marine | MD99-00658

    Original file (MD99-00658.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 (D and E).The applicant’s counsel alleges that the discharge was excessive for her misconduct and that she signed her right away for counsel. The Manual for Courts-Martial authorizes the award of a punitive discharge if adjudged as part of the sentence upon conviction by a special or general court-martial for violation of the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500777

    Original file (ND0500777.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. I would then be taken before a board, given a representative And at that time I should tell them I joined specifically to play basketball for the Navy. As the representative, we ask that consideration be given to equitable relief, as this is a matter that involves a determination whether a discharge should be changed under the equity...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00263

    Original file (ND03-00263.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-00263 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20021203. Issue of request for an upgrade in character of service”Additional issues submitted by Applicant’s counsel/representative (American Legion):“2. 010611: 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 your punishments under the Uniform Code of Military Justice during your current...

  • 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 | ND00-00094

    Original file (ND00-00094.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The discharge shall remain: UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS but the reason should be corrected to say PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-140 (formerly 3630600).The NDRB noted an administrative error on the original DD Form 214. Applicant declared a deserter 98MAR13, having been an unauthorized absentee since 1130 98FEB10, from USS THEODORE ROOSEVELT (CVN 71).980616: Surrendered at Personnel Support Activity, MacDill AFB, Tampa, FL. The names, and votes of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-01125

    Original file (ND02-01125.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant's DD Form 214 (Member 1 and 4) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 990424 - 990527 COG Active: None Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 990528 Date of Discharge: 011105 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 02 05 08 Inactive: None 011028: Applicant...