Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501412
Original file (ND0501412.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-SN, USN
Docket No. ND05-01412

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20050822. 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. 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. 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 20060427. 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) by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct .

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

 No issues were submitted by the Applicant.

 Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Character Reference ltr from J_ D. F_, dtd July 01, 2005
Applicant’s DD Form 214 (Service 2)
Applicant’s Enlist/Reenlistment Document (5 pages)
Applicant’s Montgomery GI Bill
History of Assignments (2 pages)
Administrative Remarks (9 pages)
Questionnaire for National Security Positions Form (9 pages)
Standard Form 86 (2 pages)
Record of Military Processing (6 pages)
Evaluation Report & Counseling Record, dtd January 01, 1999 to January 15, 1999
(2 pages)
Evaluation Report & Counseling Record, dtd August 21, 1999 to July 15, 2000 (2 pages)
Evaluation Report & Counseling Record, dtd July 15, 1999 to October 16, 2000 (2 pages)
Enlisted Qualifications History
Awards
Navy Service Schools/Military Training Courses
Personnel Qualification Standards
Ltr from Commanding Officer, USS BRIDGE (AOE 10), dtd October 6, 2000 (2pages)
Administrative Separation Processing Notice-Notification Procedure, dtd October 2, 2000
Administrative Remarks – NJP, dtd September 28, 2000
Administrative Remarks – NJP, dtd June 17, 1999
Administrative Remarks – Retention Warning, dtd June 17, 1999
Administrative Remarks – Retention Warning, dtd May 01, 1999
Administrative Remarks – NJP, dtd April 03, 1999
Administrative Remarks – Retention Warning, dtd April 03, 1999
Record of Emergency data (3 pages)
Security Termination Statement
Report of Medical Examination (2 pages)
Servicemembers Group Life Insurance Election and Certificate Form
Report of Medical History (4 pages)
Ltr from The American Legion, R. S_, Military Review Boards, Representative,
dtd August 12, 2005

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     Uknown - 19980929                 COG
 Inactive: USNR (DEP)     19980930 – 19981005               COG
          Active: None

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 19981006             Date of Discharge: 20001016

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 02 00 10
         Inactive: None

 Time Lost During This Period (days):
         Unauthorized absence: None
         Confinement:              None

 Age at Entry: 21

 Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 12                                 AFQT: 32

 Highest Rate: SN

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 2.7 (3)              Behavior: 1.7 (3)                 OTA: 2 .56

Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, (as listed on the DD Form 214): Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal, Sea Service Deployment Ribbon.


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

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

990403:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 91: Insubordinate conduct towards a petty officer; Violation of UCMJ, Article 134: Disorderly conduct.
         Award: 27 days of extra duty.

990403:  Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (Violation of UCMJ Articles 134 and 91.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.
990501:  Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (Absence from assigned place of duty (Late 1 hour, 36 mins) and sleeping on duty at 1500, 30 April 99.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.
990617:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence; violation of UCMJ, Article 91: Insubordinate conduct toward a petty officer.
 Award: Three days of bread and water.

 990617:  Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (Violation UCMJ Articles 86 and 91.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.
000927:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 91: Disrespect.
 Award: Forfeiture of ½ pay per month for 2 months (suspended for 6 months), restriction and extra duty for 45 days (15 days restriction and extra duty suspended for 6 months), reduction to E-2. No indication of appeal in the record.
001002:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with the least favorable characterization of service as general (under honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct due to pattern of misconduct.
001002:  Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult with counsel, elected to waive all rights except the right to obtain copies of the documents used to support the basis for the separation.


001006:  Commanding Officer, USS BRIDGE (AOE 1), recommended to Commander, Naval Personnel Center (NPC 83) that the Applicant will be discharged with a general (under honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to pattern of misconduct. Commanding Officer’s comments: “SN R_ T_ (Applicant) was processed for administrative separation for a Pattern of Misconduct. He continues to violate the UCMJ for blatant disregard for authority as evidenced by his three non-judicial punishments. This behavior is detrimental to good order and discipline, and cannot be tolerated. He is an administrative burden and lacks potential for future naval service.”

 *Discharge package is missing Separating Authority approval.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion
The Applicant was discharged on 20001016 by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct (A and B) with a service characterization of general (under honorable conditions). 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 Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (E).

The Applicant introduced no decisional issues for consideration by the Board. After reviewing the record, the Board advises the Applicant that w hen the service of a member of the U.S. Navy has been honest and faithful, it is appropriate to characterize that service as honorable. A general 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. Three retention warnings and three nonjudicial punishment proceedings for violations of UCMJ Article 86 (unauthorized absence), Article134 (disorderly conduct), and 2 specs of Article 91(failure to obey a lawful order), marred the Applicant’s service. The NDRB advises the Applicant that certain serious offenses warrant separation from the Navy in order to maintain proper order and discipline. Violations of Article 86 and 91 are considered serious offenses and typically warrant a punitive discharge if adjudged at a special or general court-martial. 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.

The NDRB advises the Applicant, that an element of his discharge package (Separating authority approval) is missing. In the absence of a complete discharge package, the Board presumed regularity of governmental affairs and that the Applicant’s discharge was regular in all respects. The evidence of record does not demonstrate that the Applicant was not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions. Relief denied.

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, and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities. As of this time, the Applicant has not provided sufficient post-service documentation for the Board to consider. 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 additional evidence related to this 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. 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 UCMJ, Article 86 (Unauthorized absence) and Article 91(disobeying a lawful order).
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 .

 E. 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
                  Washington Navy Yard DC 20374-5023

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600306

    Original file (ND0600306.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Inactive: None Time Lost During This Period (days): Unauthorized absence: 2 days Confinement: None Age at Entry: 19 Years Contracted: 4 Education Level: 12 AFQT: 53 Highest Rate: GM3 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks): Performance: 3.0 (4) Behavior: 2.8 (4) OTA: 2.92 Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500753

    Original file (ND0500753.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Therefore, I separated FA W_ (Applicant) on 11 May 2000 for personality disorder with a characterization of General (Under Honorable Conditions). Under applicable regulations, separations based on a personality disorder should be honorable unless a general (under honorable conditions) or an entry-level separation is warranted.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00455

    Original file (ND02-00455.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:NAVPERS 1070/613, Administrative Remarks, Retention Warning, dtd 13Oct99 NAVPERS 1070/613, Administrative Remarks, NJP action, dtd 15Sep 99 Copy of DD Form 214. No indication of appeal in the record.991209: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due pattern of misconduct and due...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00784

    Original file (ND04-00784.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-RMSN, USN Docket No. The Applicant requested the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500933

    Original file (ND0500933.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION After reviewing these records, I feel that my conduct may not have warranted an other than honorable discharge. At this time, the Applicant has not provided sufficient documentation of post service character and conduct to mitigate the misconduct that resulted in his characterization of discharge.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501486

    Original file (ND0501486.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ]910401: Report of Medical History: Applicant reported present “health is excellent” and that he is not on medications.910402: Commanding Officer, USS PREBLE 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. The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, falls well below that required for an honorable characterization...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00051

    Original file (ND00-00051.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. P: Level II treatment recommended.911125: Medical: Applicant reinterviewed and still concluded applicant is abusive of ETOH not dependent at this time. 920807: Commanding officer recommended discharge under Other Than Honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a Pattern of Misconduct,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00403

    Original file (ND02-00403.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-MSSR, USN Docket No. Award: Confinement for 10 days, forfeiture of $563 per month for 1 months, reduction to E-1 and restriction for 20 days.911213: To confinement.911222: From confinement to full duty.920110: Commander, Submarine Group 9 notified applicant of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501376

    Original file (ND0501376.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant’s DD Form 214 (2) Evaluation Report & Counseling Record (2 pgs) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: None Active:...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600235

    Original file (ND0600235.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND06-00235 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20051116. 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 “ PARENTHOOD OR CUSTODY OF MINOR CHILDREN. Issues, as stated Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application and attached letter: “ Upgrade of change is requested Because I would like to still have the opportunity to fight...