Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500478
Original file (ND0500478.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-SR, USN
Docket No. ND05-00478

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20050112. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge changed to general/under honorable conditions. The Applicant requests a personal appearance hearing before the Board in the Washington, D.C. Metropolitan area. The Applicant did not list any representative on the DD Form 293. In the acknowledgement letter, the Applicant was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20050511. 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/MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910 - 142 (formerly 3630605).





PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

 Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

1. “I need an upgrade of my RE Code in order to enlist in the army and honorably serve my country during this time of trouble for the US. I made a mistake of steroid use trying to get back to BUDS. I did not take recreational drugs for enjoyment and I ask to not be punished forever for one immature mistake. Our country needs soldiers that believe in what the US.A. stands for. I simply wish for a chance to enlist in the army and serve my country proudly and honorably as my father and grandfathers before me.”

 Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Letter from Department of the Army, Office of the Chief of Legislative Liaison to United State Senator, Honorable Robert C. Byrd, dated October 22, 2004
Statement from Applicant, undated

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     971122 - 971221  COG
         Active: None

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 971222               Date of Discharge: 990120

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 01 00 29         Does not exclude lost time
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 20                          Years Contracted: 4 (24 months extension)

 Education Level: 13                        AFQT: 92

 Highest Rate: SA

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: NMF*                 Behavior: NMF             OTA: NMF

Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: None

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: 34

*No marks found in service record.

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-142 (formerly 3630605).

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :
980825:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Disobeying a lawful order.
         Award: Forfeiture of $217 per month for 1 month, restriction and extra duty for 7 days, reduction to E-1. No indication of appeal in the record.
981020:  Applicant to unauthorized absence 0700, 981020.

981124:  Applicant from unauthorized absence 0225, 981124 (34 days/surrendered).

981210:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Absence without leave, violation of UCMJ, Article 112A: Wrongfully use a controlled substance, to wit: steroids.
         Award: Forfeiture of $519 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days. No indication of appeal in the record.
981222:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense and misconduct due to drug abuse. The lease favorable characterization of service possible is Under Other Than Honorable.
981222:  Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights except the right to obtain copies of the documents used to support the basis for the separation.
990108:  Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.

990108:  Chief of Naval Education and Training directed the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.

990120:  DD Form 214: Applicant discharged

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 19990120 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (A & B). The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (C). 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).

Issue 1: 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. 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 2 nonjudicial punishment proceedings for violations of Articles 86, 92, and 112a of the UCMJ. The Applicant’s violation of Article 86 (UA) for a period of 34 days constitutes commission of a serious offense. 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. Relief is not warranted.

Since the NDRB has no jurisdiction over reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Navy, Marine Corps, or any other of the Armed Forces, NDRB is not authorized to change a reenlistment code. An unfavorable “RE” code is, in itself, not a bar to reenlistment. A request for a waiver can be submitted during the processing of a formal application for reenlistment through a recruiter. Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) can make changes to reenlistment codes.

The following is provided for the edification of the Applicant. Normally, to permit relief, a procedural impropriety or inequity must have occurred during the discharge process for the period of enlistment in question. The Board discovered no impropriety after a review of Applicant’s case. 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 naval service. The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge to the extent such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the Applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review. Examples of documentation that should be provided to the Board include proof of educational pursuits, verifiable employment records, documentation of community service, credible evidence of a substance free lifestyle, and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities. As of this time, the Applicant has not provided documentation for the Board to consider.


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. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 18, effective
12 Dec 97 until 29 March 2000, Article 1910-142 [formerly 3630605]. SEPARATION BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT- COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE .
B. In Appendix 12 of the Manual for Courts-Martial, a punitive discharge is authorized for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Article 86, for unauthorized absence for a period in excess of 30 days if adjudged at a Special or General Court Martial.
C. 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.

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

 E. 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 | 2006_Navy | ND0600126

    Original file (ND0600126.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Therefore, it is recommended that Seaman Recruit Y_ (Applicant) be separated from the naval service with an Other Than Honorable discharge.”GCMCA, Chief of Naval Education and Training directed the Applicant's discharge with other than honorable by reason of misconduct commission of a serious offense.990120: DD Form 214: Applicant discharged under other than honorable...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00322

    Original file (ND00-00322.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00322 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000112, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. In the acknowledgement letter to the applicant, the applicant was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-01198

    Original file (ND01-01198.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).Issue 1: The Applicant believes that his general discharge for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense, i.e. missing ships movement, was inequitable. The Applicant’s service is equitably characterized as general (under honorable conditions) and the reason for discharge, misconduct, appropriately describes...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00448

    Original file (ND99-00448.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    (incomplete discharge package) PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 980515 under honorable conditions (general) for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (A). 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00394

    Original file (ND00-00394.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00394 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000209, requested that the reason for the discharge be changed to hardship. 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).In the applicant’s issue 1, the applicant states “m At this time, the applicant has not provided any documentation of good character and conduct.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500053

    Original file (ND0500053.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Character, Narrative Reason, and Authority of Discharge (at time of issuance):GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-142 (formerly 3630605). Bill educational benefits, not the Naval Discharge Review Board.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00226

    Original file (ND00-00226.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 990127 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (A and B). • the specific circumstances of the offense warrant separation; • the offense would warrant a punitive discharge per MCM, Appendix 12 for the same or closely related offense. Pers-8 will direct processing for separation if the case is substantiated for child sexual abuse.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-01456

    Original file (ND04-01456.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Award: Administrative separation.980928: DD Form 214: Applicant discharged with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-142.Applicant’s discharge package missing from service record PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-01189

    Original file (ND04-01189.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to 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 (2 pages) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR(DEP) 010517 - 010530 COG Active: None Period of Service Under Review :Date of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00896

    Original file (ND03-00896.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. (Equity Issue) This former member opines that personal and family problems sufficiently mitigated his misconduct of record to warrant recharacterization of his service period to fully honorable.2 (Equity Issue) This former member further requests that the Board include provisions of SECNAVINST 5420.174C, enclosure (1), Chapter 9, as it pertains to post-service conduct, in...