Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500890
Original file (ND0500890.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB)
 DISCHARGE REVIEW
DECISIONAL DOCUMENT
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

ex-OSSR, USN
Docket No. ND05-00890

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20050504. The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review. The Applicant designated American Legion as the representative on the DD Form 293.

 Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20051117. 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 and reason for discharge shall not change. The discharge shall remain Under Other Than Honorable Conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.
PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

 Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

“My discharge was inequitable because it was based on seven isolated incidents in 108 months of service with no other adverse action.”
Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Employment Reference Letter, undated
Letter of Recommendation dtd April 26, 2005
Police Record Report dtd April 25, 2005

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: USNR (Dep)              19900430 – 19901003               COG
         Active: USN                        19901004 – 19941002               HON

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 19941003             Date of Discharge: 19990804

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 04 10 01
         Inactive: None

 Time Lost During This Period (days):
         Unauthorized absence:    Unknown
         Confinement:                       Unknown

 Age at Entry: 21

 Years Contracted: 5

Education Level: 12                                 AFQT: 34

 Highest Rate: OS2

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 2.25 (4)             Behavior: 1.75 (4)                OTA: 2.42 5.0 scale
                   3.6 (1)                           3.4 (1)                           3.8 4.0 scale
 Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, (as listed on the DD Form 214): Joint Meritorious Unit Award, Meritorious Unit Commendation, National Defense Service Medal, Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal, Southwest Asia Service Medal, Sea Service Deployment Ribbons (3), Kuwait Liberation Medal (Kuwait).


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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT, authority: MILPERSMAN, Article 1910-140 (formerly 3630600).
Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

941003:  Reenlisted this date for a term of 5 years.

950330:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence.
         Award: Restriction and extra duty to USS ARKANSAS (CGN-41) 7 days. No indication of appeal in the record.

951013:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Dereliction of duties.
 Violation of UCMJ, Article 115: Malingering.
         Award: Forfeiture of $100 per month for 1 month, reduction to E-4 (suspended for 6 months). No indication of appeal in the record.

980409:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92 (2 Specifications): Failure to obey order or regulation.
Violation of UCMJ, Article 121: Larceny and wrongful appropriation.
         Award: Forfeiture of $200 per month for 1 month (suspended for 3 months), restriction to base for 30 days, extra duties for 30 days, reduction to next inferior pay grade (suspended for 3 months). No indication of appeal in the record.

980709:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: (4 Specifications).
         Award: Not found in record. [Extracted from Commanding Officer’s message of 990728].

980709:  NAVPERS 1070/613 issued. [Extracted from Commanding Officer’s message of 990728].

981006:  Reduction in pay grade awarded at NJP on 980409 vacated due to continued misconduct.
981020:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92 and 121.
         Award: Due to continued misconduct the reduction to next inferior paygrade 980409 is hereby vacated this date.

981026:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 121: Larceny and wrongful appropriation, in that MBR did on or about 12 Feb 98, steal U.S. Currency in the amount of approximately $120.00, military property of the United States.
         Award: Forfeiture of $240 per month for 1 month, restriction to base for 30 days, reduction to E-3. No indication of appeal in the record.
990329:  General Court-Martial.
         Charge: violation of the UCMJ, Article 134:
         Finding: Not found in record.
         Sentence: Not found in record. [Extracted from Commanding Officer’s message of 990728].
Unknown:         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 pattern of misconduct and misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense. The Board recommended separation under other than honorable conditions [Extracted from Commanding Officer’s message of 990728].

 990721:  Letter of Deficiency. [Extracted from Commanding Officer’s message of 990728].

990728:  Commanding Officer, Transient Personnel Unit Puget Sound, recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct pattern of misconduct and misconduct commission of a serious offense. Commanding Officer’s comments: “OSSR B_ (Applicant) is being processed for Misconduct-Pattern of Misconduct and Misconduct-Commission of a Serious Offense. He has no potential for further naval service. OSSR B_’s (Applicant) disregard for basic Navy core values is extremely detrimental to the good order and discipline of the Navy. OSSR B_ (Applicant) is currently being carried in an unauthorized absence status. Therefore, I recommend discharging him in absentia with an Other Than Honorable.”

990730:  Commander, Navy Region Northwest, directed the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of pattern of misconduct.

Service Record contains a partial Administrative Discharge package.
Service Record was missing elements of the Summary of Service.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion
The Applicant was discharged in absentia on 19990804 by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct (A) with a service characterization of under other than honorable conditions. 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 Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (D).

By regulation, a discharge shall be deemed proper, unless it is determined that an error of fact, law, procedure, or discretion has substantially prejudiced the rights of the Applicant. The Applicant was discharged under other than honorable conditions by reason of a pattern of misconduct. A review of the Applicant’s service record convinced the Board that a preponderance of evidence exists to support the Applicant’s basis for separation by virtue of his multiple NJPs, NAVPERS 1070/613 retention warning and general court-martial conviction. On 19990728, the Commanding Officer, Transient Personnel Unit Puget Sound, recommended to Commander, Navy Region Northwest, that the Applicant be discharged under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. Although the administrative discharge was incomplete, the Commanding Officer’s letter referenced the Applicant’s misconduct, discharge processing, page 13 entry, and general court-martial conviction. On 19990730, Navy Region Northwest directed the Applicant’s discharge. Based upon the above review, the Board unanimously concluded that the Applicant’s discharge processing was in substantial compliance with applicable statutes, rules, and regulations. The Board could find no error of fact, law, procedure, or discretion that might afford the Applicant relief. Thus, the Board concluded that relief is not warranted.

The Applicant contends that his discharge is inequitable because it is based on seven isolated incidents in 108 months of total service. Applicable regulations require that a Sailor’s characterization of service be based upon the member’s total performance of duty and conduct during the current enlistment. Furthermore, there are circumstances where conduct or performance of duty reflected by a single adverse incident may form the basis of characterization for a Sailor’s overall service. The incident need not result in formal punishment to be properly used to characterize a Sailor’s service. T he Applicant’s service was marred by six nonjudicial punishment proceedings and one general court-martial conviction for violations of UCMJ Articles 86, 92, 115, 121, and 134. 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.

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 could be provided to the Board include proof of educational pursuits, verifiable employment records, documentation of community service, and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities. The Board received and considered all of the Applicant’s submissions, including his letter of recommendation, proof of employment, and criminal records check. After careful consideration, the Board concluded the Applicant’s post-service achievements have been insufficient to mitigate his misconduct while in the Naval service. 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. 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 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, Para 211, Regularity of Government Affairs .

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

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-01039

    Original file (ND99-01039.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Commanding officer’s comments (verbatim): "I strongly agree with the Board's findings and recommend that OSSR (Applicant) be administratively discharged from the naval service by reason of his misconduct due to commission of a serious offense and misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct, and that the characterization of his discharge be under Other Than Honorable conditions. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000381

    Original file (ND1000381.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant was properly notified that he was being administratively processed and appeared before an administrative board, who determined that he be separated from the Navy with an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions characterization. Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s personal testimony, post service factors, summary of service, official medical and record entries, and the discharge process, the Board found Therefore,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600086

    Original file (ND0600086.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. I therefore strongly recommend that EMFN G_ (Applicant) be separated from the naval service and that he receives an Other Than Honorable characterization of service.”010523: Commander, Amphibious Group TWO, authorize the Commanding Officer, USS BATAAN (LHD 5) that the Applicant will be discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct. The names,...

  • 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600601

    Original file (ND0600601.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events : 900401: Applicant to unauthorized absence at 0715.900404: Applicant from unauthorized absence at 1830 (3 days/surrendered).900413: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence on or about 0715, 900401 to 1830, 900404.Violation of UCMJ, Article 90: Failure to obey a lawful command from a superior commissioned officer on or about 900331. Therefore, the NDRB determined that the reason for the Applicant’s discharge shall not...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00993

    Original file (ND99-00993.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In the acknowledgement letter to the applicant, he was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing and that this Board does not travel. is reminded that he is eligible for a personal appearance hearing provided the application is received within 15 years from the date of discharge. You may obtain a copy of DoD Directive 1332.28 by writing to: DA Military Review Boards Agency Management Information and...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00510

    Original file (ND00-00510.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    No indication of appeal in the record.910901: [USS MOUNT WHITNEY (LCC-20)] notified applicant of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct an misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense [EXTRACTED FROM CO'S MESSAGE]. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 911220 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to a...

  • USMC | DRB | 2000_Marine | MD00-00476

    Original file (MD00-00476.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD00-00476 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010301, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. I WANT TO MAKE UP FOR IT, AND REENLIST AND STAY IN THE MILITARY FOR LIFE OR AT LEAST UNTIL I RETIRE. Age at Entry: 18 Years Contracted: 4 Education Level: 12 AFQT: 49 Highest Rank: Pvt Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks): Proficiency: 3.6 (2) Conduct: 1.8 (4)...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00328

    Original file (ND99-00328.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ]970802: Vacate reduction to E-2 awarded at CO's NJP dated 22 May 1997. )971117: Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ, Article 27B, elected to waive all rights.971212: Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to Commission of a Serious Offense and misconduct due to a Pattern of Misconduct as evidenced by CO's NJP 22MAY97 for violation of UCMJ, Article 134 general...

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0500878

    Original file (MD0500878.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD05-00878 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20050419. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. 980326: Applicant appealed NJP of 980319.980401: Awarded forfeiture of $242.00 pay per month for 1month (suspended for 6 months), no further relief granted.980422: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct...