Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00509
Original file (ND99-00509.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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




ex-HA, USN
Docket No. ND99-00509

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review, received 990301, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. The applicant did not list any representative on the DD Form 293.


Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 000104. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, NDRB discerned no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the applicant’s service. 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 – commission of a serious offense, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.


PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

1. I D_____ L. C_______ wish to have my discharge upgraded. Due to the fact of serving time in Desert Storm from August to May. After returning was sentence to serve time in the brig for ninety days. After completing 90 days was offered to complete a program and return to active duty. At that time I denied the program at opped to be discharged. I am a sound citizen and I have been married for eight years with two beautiful children. Please consider the upgrade. I thank you for your time.

Documentation

In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:

None.


PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):

         Active: USN                        None
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     880616 - 890613  COG

Period of Service Under Review :

Date of Enlistment: 890614               Date of Discharge: 920504

Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 02 05 14
         Inactive: None

Age at Entry: 18                          Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 43

Highest Rate: HA

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance: NOB                  Behavior: NOB             OTA : NOB

Military Decorations: None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM

Days of Unauthorized Absence: 84

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/Misconduct – commission of a serious offense, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

901019:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 134: Fraudulent use of a credit card; violation of UCMJ Article 121: (Theft), larceny.

         Award: Forfeiture of 7 days pay, extra duty for 14 days, (Suspended all punishment and fines for 6 months). No indication of appeal in the record.

910821:  Report of Declaration of Deserter (NAVPERS 1600-3). Applicant declared a deserter on 910821 having been an unauthorized absentee since 0730, 910722 from NAVHOSP SAN DIEGO CA.

911016:  Report of Return of Deserter. Applicant surrendered to military authorities on 1055, 911016 at NAVHOSP SAN DIEGO, CA. Returned to military control 911016, 1055. Retained onboard for disciplinary action.

920220:  SPCM for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: UA from 910722 to 911016, violation of UCMJ Article 121: (2 Specifications), Larceny and wrongful appropriation of a combined value of about $58.00 on or about 900602 to on or about 900609, violation of UCMJ Article 134: (2 Specifications), Wrongfully and unlawfully obtain telephone calls by charging them to a US Sprint calling card from on or about 900405 through on or about 900601.
         Sent: Confinement for 90 days, forfeiture of $100 per month for 6 months.
         CA (920312) Sentence approved and will be executed.

920504:  Released from confinement and restored to full duty.


PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 920504 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (A). The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (B). 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 applicant introduced no decisional issues for consideration by the Board.

The following is provided for the applicant’s edification. The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. The applicant must be aware that 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 the civilian life subsequent to leaving the service. Normally, to permit relief, an error or injustice must have been found to have existed during the period of enlistment in question. Outstanding post-service conduct, to the extent that such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review, may be considered by the NDRB. The applicant is reminded that he is eligible for a personal appearance hearing provided the application is received within 15 years from the date of discharge. Representation at personal appearance hearing is highly recommended.



Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), effective 15 Aug 91 until
04 Mar 93, Article 3630600, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT – COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE.

B. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (Manual for Discharge Review, 1984), enclosure (1), Chapter 2, AUTHORITY/POLICY FOR DEPARTMENTAL DISCHARGE REVIEW.

C. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (Manual for Discharge Review, 1984), enclosure (1), Chapter 9, paragraph 9.2, PROPRIETY OF THE DISCHARGE.

D. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (Manual for Discharge Review, 1984), enclosure (1), Chapter 9, paragraph 9.3, EQUITY OF THE DISCHARGE.


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 obtain a copy of DoD Directive 1332.28 by writing to:

                  DA Military Review Boards Agency
                  Management Information and Support Directorate
                  Armed Forces Reading Room
                  Washington, D.C. 20310-1809

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:

                  Naval Council of Personnel Boards
                  Attn: Naval Discharge Review Board
                  Washington Navy Yard
                  720 Kennon Street SE RM 309
                  Washington, D.C. 20374-5023     



Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00002

    Original file (ND00-00002.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 (D and E).In the applicant’s issue 1, the Board determined this issue is without merit. You should read Enclosure (5) of the Directive before submitting such a complaint. You may obtain a copy of DoD Directive 1332.28 by writing to: DA Military Review Boards Agency Management Information and Support Directorate Armed Forces...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00892

    Original file (ND01-00892.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The discharge shall remain: UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/Misconduct – commission of a serious offense, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600. I am trying to get a house and a job with the Post Office and with this on my record, I regret it every day! Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), effective 15 Aug 91 until 04 Mar 93, Article 3630600, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT – COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE.B.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00105

    Original file (ND01-00105.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Letter from Applicant (3pgs) Response Letter from Applicant (2pgs) Copy of DD Form 214 Congressional correspondence, dated 22 March 2001 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: NONE Inactive: NONE Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 890412 Date of Discharge: 920427 Length of Service...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00288

    Original file (ND01-00288.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 910312 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (A and B). In the applicant’s issues 2 and 3, the Board recognizes that serving in the Navy is very challenging to both the Sailor and his family members. At this time, the applicant has not provided any documentation of good character and conduct.

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00733

    Original file (ND99-00733.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    (EQUITY ISSUE) This former member further requests that the Board include provisions of SECNAVINST 5420.17C., enclosure (1), Chapter 9, as it pertains to post-service conduct, in assessing the merits of his application. 930511: Applicant advised of his rights and having consulted 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.930511: Commanding officer recommended...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-01023

    Original file (ND02-01023.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-01023 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020711, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. No indication of appeal in the record.920710: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: UA from unit from 920526 to 920615 (20 days/S); violation of UCMJ, Article 87: Missed ship's movement on 920527. The Applicant is reminded that he remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00442

    Original file (ND00-00442.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-DCFR, USN Docket No. Applicant surrendered to military authorities on 1113, 900705 onboard USS FAIRFAX COUNTY at Little Creek, VA. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 910329 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (A).

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00863

    Original file (ND99-00863.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-SMSN, USN Docket No. ND99-00863 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 990611, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. Relief to a fully Honorable discharge is, however, not warranted.The applicant’s second issue states: “I have been very involved in the Children’s Ministry at my Church and in Latino Affairs at the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00677

    Original file (ND03-00677.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions and the reason for the discharge be changed. Not appealed.920213: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.920218: Applicant advised of his rights and having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to appear...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-01019

    Original file (ND00-01019.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) also advised that the board first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing. 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 applicant’s first issue states: “Veteran was harassed by command when asked to see a JAG Lawyer Rep. Relief is not warranted.The applicant’s second issue states:...