Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500241
Original file (ND0500241.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-AN, USN
Docket No. ND05-00241

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20041115. 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 20050201. 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 HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL)/MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

 Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

1. “Between May of 1991 and August of 1993 I got 2 DUI’s in San Diego out on town. (Not on Base). As a result of these charges against me I was released from the Navy.

I’m now applying for a government job and need to have my discharge upgraded.”
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)     880912 - 880922  COG
         Active: USN                        880923 – 920826  HON

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 920827               Date of Discharge: 931015

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 01 01 20
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 20                          Years Contracted: 3

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 31

 Highest Rate: AN

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.20 (3)             Behavior: 3.33 (3)                OTA: 3.53

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: MUC, AFEM, SSDR, NDSM

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

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

UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL)/MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

921221:  Counseled for dereliction of duty, disobeying a petty officer.

921230:  Counseled for disobedience of and disrespect to a CPO.

 930604:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86 (3 specs): UA, violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Failure to obey order; and violation of UCMJ, Article 134: Drunkenness- incapacitation for performance of duties.
         Award: Reduction to AA (suspended for 6 months). No indication of appeal in the record.
930809:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense, and misconduct due to a civilian conviction evidenced by San Diego Municipal Court Traffic “A” on 921106, and alcohol rehabilitation failure.
930809:  Applicant advised of rights and having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to appear before an Administrative Discharge Board.
930914:  An Administrative Discharge Board, based upon a preponderance of the evidence and by unanimous vote, found that the Applicant had committed misconduct due to a serious offense, misconduct due to a civil conviction, and failed alcohol rehabilitation, that the misconduct warranted separation, and recommended discharge under honorable conditions (general).

930917:  Commanding Officer recommended discharge under honorable conditions (general) by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense, misconduct due to a civilian conviction, and alcohol rehabilitation failure. Commanding Officer’s comments: This individual was given a chance to overcome his problem with alcohol, but chose to start drinking again after attending Alcohol Rehabilitation Level III. Member has 3 off-base DUIs.

931001:  BUPERS directed the Applicant's discharge under honorable conditions (general) by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 19931015 under honorable conditions (general) for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (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 honorable conditions (general) 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. T he Applicant’s service was marred by award of nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on one occasion for unauthorized absence, disobedience of orders, and drunkenness. The Applicant was convicted by a civilian court on another occasion, and failed alcohol rehabilitation treatment. 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 is inappropriate. Relief denied.

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, to enhance employment opportunities, or for 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 5, effective
05 Mar 93 until 21 Jul 94, Article 3630600, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT – COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE.

 B. 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.

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

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

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 | 2005_Navy | ND0500243

    Original file (ND0500243.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.910707: Applicant admitted to alcohol rehabilitation department with a diagnosis of alcohol dependence.910816: Applicant discharged from inpatient hospitalization with an aftercare treatment plan.921219: Applicant screened by CAAC as a result of a DUI 921028, with a BAC of .19.930211: Civil Conviction: General...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-01217

    Original file (ND02-01217.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 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 900627 - 910619 COG Active: None Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 910620 Date of Discharge: 940909 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 03 02 20 Inactive: None 940614: An Administrative Discharge...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00109

    Original file (ND04-00109.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. Respectfully request my under other than honorable condition separation, which is stated on my copy of my DD-14 to be upgraded to a separation of General Under honorable conditions!” 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00884

    Original file (ND99-00884.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 940330 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (A). 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 applicant’s issue states: “My undesirable discharge was inequitable because it was based on items that...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600879

    Original file (ND0600879.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable and the Narrative Reason for Separation be changed to “ misconduct or RE-3. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00325

    Original file (ND02-00325.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00325 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020128, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. I was standing outside the rear passenger door on the driver side when a meter maid style police car pulled up & told me to move the vehicle out of the middle of the street. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00159

    Original file (ND99-00159.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    930824: An Administrative Discharge Board, based upon a preponderance of the evidence and by unanimous vote, found that the applicant had committed alcohol rehabilitation failure, misconduct due to serious offense, misconduct due to civil conviction, that the misconduct warranted separation, and recommended separation be suspended for 12 months, discharge general under honorable conditions. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01365

    Original file (ND03-01365.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The discharge shall remain: UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL)/Misconduct – commission of a serious offense, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00421

    Original file (ND00-00421.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION No indication of appeal in the record.940502: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse as evidenced by all drug incidents in your current enlistment and the commission of a serious offenses as evidenced by your violation of the UCMJ, Article 92 by drinking alcoholic beverages while under the age of 21 and violation of the UCMJ, Article 111 drunk...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-01278

    Original file (ND04-01278.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. 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. As of this time, the Applicant has not provided any documentation for the Board to consider.