Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600365
Original file (ND0600365.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-AMAR, USN
Docket No. ND06-00365

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20060104 . The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions) . The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review. The Applicant did not designate a representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20061109 . 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 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 attached l etter:
“ To whom it may concern:

 I am submitting this formal application for review of my discharge from the United States Navy . I entered into service on the 29 November 2001 and was discharged on 28 March 2003. M y total time in the service is one year two months and twenty five days.
I humbly request a change of my discharge so that I my renter the service of my country. I feel that I can be a great asset to the armed forces if only given the chance.
I humbly request my discharge be changed from an “ o ther than honorable” to a “general under honorable conditions.” If this change is made I will be able to renter the armed forces and serve my country.
In closing I would like to thank you for taking the time to review my file and considering my request.

Sincerely, [signed] N_ M. M_ (Applicant) ”

Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Applicant’s DD Form 214 (Member 4)

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     20010727 - 20011128       COG
          Active: None

Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 20011129              Date of Discharge: 20030328

Length of Service (years, months, days):

          Active: 0 1 0 4 00 (Does not exclude lost time )
         Inactive: None

 Time Lost During This Period (days):
         Unauthorized absence: 35
         Confinement:              None

Age at Entry: 18

Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 12 *                        AFQT: 59

Highest Rate: AMAA

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: NA* *                  Behavior: NA* *             OTA: NA**

Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, (as listed on the DD Form 214): None.

*Not verifiable in record
* * Not Available


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 :

021105:  Applicant to unauthorized absence. [Extracted from DD 214.]
021114:  Applicant from unauthorized absence. [Extracted from DD 214.]

 021115:  Applicant to unauthorized absence from his prescribed place of duty, to wit: FIGHTER SQUADRON ELEVEN, at NAS Oceana, VA on or about 0630 on 021115.
021119:  Applicant from unauthorized absence at 0 630 on 021119.

021122:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence.
 Violation of UCMJ, Article 91: Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, noncommissioned officer or petty officer.
         Award: Forfeiture of ½ pay per month for 2 months, restriction for 60 days, reduction to E-1. No indication of appeal in the record.
021122:  Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (NJP 021122: Violation of UCMJ Art. 86 Unauthorized Absence (2 Specifications) and Art. 91 Insubordinate conduct toward a Petty Officer.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.
021223:  Applicant to unauthorized absence from his prescribed place of duty, to wit: FIGHTER SQUADRON ELEVEN, at NAS Oceana, VA on or about 0600 on 021223.
030114:  Applicant from unautho rized absence at 1925 on 030114.

0 30115 :  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of m isconduct pattern of misconduct. [Second page of notification not contained in record.]

030115 :  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 .
030115:  Applicant to unauthorized absence from his prescribed place of duty, to wit: FIGHTER SQUADRON ELEVEN, at NAS Oceana, VA on or about 0630 on 030115.

 030116:  Applicant from unauthorized absence at 0630 on 030116.
030116:  Applicant issued retention warning. [Extracted from Commanding Officer’s letter of 030304.]

 030116:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence.
          Award: Forfeiture of ½ pay per month for 2 months, restriction for 60 days. No indication of appeal in the record.
0 30304 :  Commanding Officer, Fighter Squadron ELEVEN recommended that the Applicant be discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct - p attern of misconduct .
Commanding Officer’s comments : “ AMAR M_ (Applicant) has been onboard Fighter Squadron ELEVEN (VF-11) for almost seven months. His performance in the command has been unsatisfactory at best.

AMAR M_’s (Applicant) multiple unauthorized absence have demonstrated an unwillingness to serve in the Navy and a total lack of commitment to his fellow Sailors in the squadron. His proven unreliability and faithless service have been an immense burden to the command. Furthermore, AMAR M_ displays no potential in the Navy. To the contrary, he has repeatedly expressed his disdain for naval service and a desire to abandon it.

Upon receiving notice of his administrative separation processing, AMAR M_ (Applicant) waived his right to a board, understanding that he would receive a service characterization of Other Than Honorable.

 AMAR M_’s (Applicant) behavior constitutes a significant departure form the conduct expected of members of the United States Navy; an Other Than Honorable discharge is the best characterization his service deserves. This type of negligent conduct reflects poorly on other Sailors in my squadron and in the Navy as a whole. In accordance with reference (a) and (b), I strongly recommend that AMAR M_ be separated from the Navy with an Other Than Honorable discharge ”
030324 :  GCMCA, COMNAVAIRLAN T, directed the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.

Service Record contains a partial Administrative Discharge package.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion
The Applicant was discharged on 20030328 by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct (A and B) with a service characterization of under other than 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).

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 four periods of unauthorized absence and two nonjudicial punishment proceedings for violations of Articles 86 and 91 of the UCMJ. Violations of Article 91 of the UCMJ are serious offenses for which a punitive discharge is authorized if adjudged as part of the sentence upon conviction at summary or special court-martial. The Applicant accumulated thirty-five 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. Relief is not warranted.

The Applicant requests that his discharge be upgraded to facilitate his reenlistment into the Armed Forces. 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. The Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment, educational or enlistment opportunities. Relief on this basis would be inappropriate.

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), re-issued October 2002, effective 22 Aug 2002 until Present, 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 91, insubordinate conduct.

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 | 2005_Navy | ND0501465

    Original file (ND0501465.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge 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:Applicant’s DD Form 214 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 20000511 – 20001102 COG Active: None Period of Service Under Review :Date...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500590

    Original file (ND0500590.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. As of this time, the Applicant’s post-service conduct has been insufficient to mitigate his misconduct while in the Naval service. 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

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00553

    Original file (ND03-00553.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-00553 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 20030212, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The Applicant is not eligible for further review by the Naval Discharge Review Board. Decision A documentary review discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20031017.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00613

    Original file (ND02-00613.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I found out that allot of recruits were offered A, C, & E schools among other things. told me they too wanted to strike out but the dept. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Letter from Applicant's mother to Captain, USS ABRAHAM LINCOLN (CVN-72) dated April 11, 1990 Letter to Applicant's mother from Commanding Officer, USS ABRAHAM LINCOLN (CVN-72) dated April 27, 1990 PART II - SUMMARY OF...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600388

    Original file (ND0600388.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500809

    Original file (ND0500809.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review. As of this time, the Applicant has not provided any post-service documentation for the Board to consider. 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

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501297

    Original file (ND0501297.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Furthermore, reference (A) directs that the service of a member separated for a pattern of misconduct shall normally be characterized as under other than honorable conditions. In the Applicant’s case the record clearly documented the pattern of misconduct for which she was separated. 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

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00505

    Original file (ND01-00505.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    No indication of appeal in the record.Retention Warning from [Fighter Squadron Seventy-Five]: Advised of deficiency (A pattern of misconduct as evidenced by three incidents resulting in Commanding Officer's Non-judicial Punishments for seven separate violations of the UCMJ), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning. 860412: Retention Warning from [Fighter Squadron Seventy-Five]: Advised of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501136

    Original file (ND0501136.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION No indication of appeal in the record.930615: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a commission of a serious offense and commission of a pattern of misconduct.930621: Applicant advised of rights and having consulted with counsel, elected to appear before an administrative discharge board, to be represented at administrative discharge board, to submit...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00656

    Original file (ND02-00656.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00656 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020411, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. The Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) also advised that the board first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing. Upon reading this, for whoever it may concern, please understand I was young and made very bad decisions please consider my upgrade, because if...