Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600404
Original file (ND0600404.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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


 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

ex-SR, USN
Docket No. ND06-00404

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20060123 . 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 did not designate a representative on the DD Form 293.
Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20061116 . After a thorough review of the available 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 commission of a serious offense .

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:
Applicant’s DD Form 214 (Member 4)
Separation Travel Orders, dtd January 4, 2005

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     20030115 - 20030516       COG
          Active: None
Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 2003051 6              Date of Discharge: 20050104

Length of Service (years, months, days):

          Active: 0 1 0 7 1 9 (Does not exclude lost time.)
         Inactive: None

 Time Lost During This Period (days):
         Unauthorized absence: 1 5 day s
         Confinement:              None

Age at Entry: 31

Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 1 3                                  AFQT: 35

Highest Rate: S N

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): National Defense Service Medal

* Not Available


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

GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS) /MISCONDUCT, authority: MILPERSMAN, Article 1910-142 (formerly 3630605).
Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

040122:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 111: Drunken or reckless operation of vehicle.
 Award: Forfeiture of ½ months pay for 2 months (suspended for 6 months), restriction and extra duty for 30 days, reduction to E-1(suspended for 6 months). No indication of appeal in the record.
040126 :  Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency ( Applicant’s violation of Article 111 of the UCMJ ), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.
040525:  Applicant to unauthorized absence at 0700 on 040525.

 040527:  Applicant from unauthorized absence at 1745 on 040527 .

0 40619 :  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86 : Unauthorized absence .
          Award: Forfeiture of ½ month ’ s pay for 2 month s , restriction for 6 0 days, reduction in rate to E- 2 from vacating punishment held on 040122. Reduction in rate to E-1 . No indication of appeal in the record.
041031:  Applicant to unauthorized absence at 2244 on 041031.

041101:  Applicant from unauthorized absence at 0700 on 041101.

041101:  Applicant to unauthorized absence at 1130 on 041101.

041115:  Applicant from unauthorized absence at 1800 on 041115.

 041119:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86 (2 Specs) :
Spec 1: On or about 2255, 041031, without authority, absent himself from his unit at which he was required to be, to wit: NTTC Complex, and did remain so absent until on or about 0700, 041101; Spec 2: On or about 1130, 041101, without authority, absent himself from his unit at which he was required to be, to wit: NTTC Complex, and did remain so absent until on or about 1800, 041115 .
 Award: Forfeiture of $700.00 per month for 1 month (suspended), restriction and extra duty for 30 days. No indication of appeal in the record.
0 41122 :  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with the least favorable characterization of service as general (under honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct pattern of misconduct and misconduct commission of a serious offense.

0 41122 :  Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult with counsel , elected to waive all rights.
050105 :  Commanding Officer, Naval Technical Center, Meridian , forwarded the administrative discharge package to CNPC . Commanding Officer’s comments : “Seaman Recruit B_ (Applicant) reported to this command 041006 . He appeared at Captain’s Mast on 041119 , where he pled guilty and was found guilty of all charges and specifications. Seaman Recruit B_ also appeared at Captain’s Mast on two separate occasions at his previous command prior to reporting to this command. His total disregard for rules and regulations clearly indicates that he has no potential for continued Naval Service. Based on the foregoing and in accordance with reference (a), recommend that Seaman Recruit B_ be separated from the Naval Service with a General Discharge. Date, reason and characterization if separated locally: Seaman Recruit B_ was separated on 4 January 2005 for Misconduct-Pattern of Misconduct and Misconduct-Commission of a Serious Offense evidenced by all incidents in current enlistment with a General Discharge. ”

Service Record was missing elements of the Summary of Service.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion
The Applicant was discharged on 2005010 4 by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (A and B) with a service characterization of general (under 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 (C and D). The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (E).

The Applicant submitted no issues for consideration.

 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 or 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. The Applicant’s service was marred by a retention warning and three nonjudicial punishment proceedings for violations of Articles 86 and 111 of the UCMJ. The Applicant’s violation of Article 111 of the UCMJ is considered the commission of a serious offense. Punitive discharges are authorized for violations of Article 111 of the UCMJ if adjudged as part of the sentence upon conviction at 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 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 any 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. 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 02 until 25 April 2005, Article 1910-142 [formerly 3630605], SEPARATION BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT - COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE.
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 111, drunken driving .
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 | ND0501134

    Original file (ND0501134.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    discharge Applicant with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of commission of a serious offense.041213: Commander, Navy Computer Incident Response Team, advised Commander, Navy Personnel Command, of Applicant’s discharge with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense. When the service of a member of the U.S. Navy has met the standard of acceptable conduct and performance, it is appropriate to characterize that service...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500641

    Original file (ND0500641.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). Award: Restriction and extra duty for 15 days.971024: Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (Commanding Officers NJP held on 23 October 1997 for violation UCMJ Article 86 – Unauthorized absence), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.971211: NJP for...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501005

    Original file (ND0501005.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I strongly recommend that he be separated from the naval service and his service be characterized as Other Than Honorable”.010809: Commander, Submarine Group 9 The Applicant provided 12 character/job reference letters, 80 pages from his service record and 6 certificates of training earned during his service, as documentation of his post service accomplishments. The Applicant can provide documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments or any other evidence related to his...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501073

    Original file (ND0501073.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). USS ENTERPRISE, on active duty, did on board USS ENTERPRISE, on or about 0700, 27 May 2002, without authority, fail to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty, to wit: pretrial restriction muster.Violation of the UCMJ, Article 89: Specification: In that Mess Management Specialist Seaman C_ L. G_ (Applicant), U.S. Navy. USS...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01226

    Original file (ND03-01226.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION Character, Narrative Reason, and Authority of Discharge (at time of issuance):UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-142 (formerly 3630605).

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600508

    Original file (MD0600508.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The cigar contained the marijuana that the Cpl had purchased, but me being the driver was charged with possession. 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 (B and C).The Applicant states, “I request that my characterization of discharge be changed to honorable because I believe that I served honorably in the Marine Corps, also there were several injustices that have...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600205

    Original file (ND0600205.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND06-00205 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. As of this time, the Applicant has not provided any post-service documentation for the Board to consider.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00229

    Original file (ND01-00229.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The discharge shall remain: UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/Misconduct - Pattern of misconduct, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600 A personal appearance hearing discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 010420. After a thorough review of the testimony, records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper and equitable (C and D).The counsel for the applicant presented six issues for the Board’s...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500717

    Original file (ND0500717.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge changed to honorable. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION 040324: Applicant from unauthorized absence at 0750 (44 days/surrendered).040329: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86 (Absent without leave)

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501129

    Original file (ND0501129.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests that his characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: None Active: None Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 19970701 Date of Discharge: 20000723 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 03 00 23 (Does not exclude lost time.) The names, and votes of the members of the Board are recorded on the original...