Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00689
Original file (ND99-00689.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-YN2, USN
Docket No. ND99-00689

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 990426, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. 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 000201. 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/IN LIEU OF TRIAL BY COURT MARTIAL, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630650.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

1.       I respectfully request that you review my records and upgrade my Other Than Honorable Discharge to Honorable.
I truly believe that my discharge was entirely unfair to my family, the Navy, and me. I’ve served my country and dedicated my life to the Navy. My career was destroyed because I suffered a financial setback. But while going through financial my evaluations and morale never faltered. I have always strive on comebacks and I was on the rebound. I volunteered to for the trip to Korea during the North Korean Buildup and when I returned back home my career seemed to be fine until charges were sought out.

Charges stemmed from delinquency on my car note to fraud. That has never been my character and when those charges were placed on me it totally destroyed my heart. If you would take the time and review my records you will see nothing no pattern or anything that would lead you to believe that I was/would ever deceive the government, Navy or my family. Being in the military has given dedication and me a sense of prided. I have been out the military for over three(3) years now and have had good jobs, which I totally credit the Navy for.

But my passion is to work for the government and be allowed to provide a decent living for my family. It feels to me everything I have worked for as of June of 1986 until November of 1996 means nothing to no one but me and my family and me. When you review my record, please review my evaluations and their contents because if you read them as those senior to me wrote them you will totally agree that I never had any intention on deceiving any one let alone the Navy. Thank you for your time and consideration.
Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
Copy of DD Form 214
Copy of Applicant’s enlisted evaluations (11 pages)
Copy of Applicant’s Enlisted Performance Record from 90Jan22 to 94Jun01
Documentation associate with Applicant’s two Navy Achievement Medals (7 pages)
Copy of Letter of Commendation
Copy of Letter of Appreciation
Certificate of Accomplishment dated 28 March 1995
Certificate of Accomplishment dated 11 April 1995

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: USN                        860627 - 900201  HON
         Active: USN                        900202 – 940601  HON
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     860531 - 860626  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 940602               Date of Discharge: 961121

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 02 05 20
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 26                          Years Contracted: 3

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 28

 Highest Rate: YN2

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.7 (4)     Behavior: 3.2 (4)                 OTA: 3.45(4.0 scale)

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NAM(2), SSDR(2), KLM, Good Conduct Medal(2), NMCOSR

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/IN LIEU OF TRIAL BY COURT MARTIAL, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-106 (formerly 3630650).

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :


960912:  Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (failure to pay just debts and financial irresponsibility), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

961015:  Charges preferred to special court-martial for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) Article 86:Unauthorized absence from 9 July 95 to 17 July 95; Article 92 (2 specs), violate a lawful general order; Article 107, with intent to deceive, sign an official statement; Article 108, willfully suffer a laptop computer, a value of $1799.00, property of the US Government; Article 121, larceny; Article 123a, issuing checks with insufficient funds; and Article 134, dishonorably failing to pay said debt of 16,903.44 due to General Motors Acceptance Corporation.

961031:  A pplicant requested an administrative discharge under other than honorable conditions in lieu of a trial by court-martial. He consulted with counsel and was fully advised of the implications of his request. The applicant stated he understood the elements of the offenses with which he was charged, and admitted he was guilty of all the charges preferred against him. Specifically, he admitted to violating UCMJ Article 86, absent without leave; Article 92 (2 specs) violating a lawful general order; Article 107, false official statement; Article 123a, making, drawing, or uttering check, draft, or order without sufficient funds; Article 134, general article. The applicant stated he was completely satisfied with the counsel he had received. The applicant understood that if discharged under other than honorable conditions, it might deprive him of virtually all veterans' benefits based upon his current enlistment, and that he might expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life in situations wherein the type of service rendered or the character of discharge received therefrom may have a bearing.

961108:  The commanding officer, exercising GCMCA, approved the request for an administrative separation in lieu of a trial by court-martial, and directed applicant’s discharge.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 961121 under other than honorable conditions in lieu of a trial by court-martial (A and B). The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (C). 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, the Board reviewed the applicant’s entire service record and determined that the applicant did indeed have a long period of honorable service. However, the seriousness of the offenses for which the applicant was discharged was the primary ingredient in the Board’s determination that the applicant’s discharge characterization was equitable. Relief denied.

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), Change 9, effective
22 Jul 94 until 2 Oct 96, Article 3630650, PROCEDURES FOR PROCESSING ENLISTED PERSONNEL FOR SEPARATION IN LIEU OF TRIAL BY COURTMARTIAL.

B. A punitive bad conduct discharge may be adjudged for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Article 92, violating a lawful general order, upon conviction by a Special or General Court-Martial, in accordance with the Manual for Courts-Martial.

C. 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.

D. 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.

E. 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 St SE Rm 309
                  Washington, D.C. 20374-5023     


Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00204

    Original file (ND00-00204.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION After a thorough review of the records, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper and equitable (D and E).In response to applicant’s issue 1, the Board found that, according to the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Article 86, an unauthorized absence for a period more than 30 days may be subject to a bad conduct discharge if the applicant is convicted at a Special or General Court-Martial. The...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00896

    Original file (ND01-00896.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00896 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010626, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to entry level separation or uncharacterized. The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. (Copies enclosed) Toward the end of my basic training approximately 23 days to graduation I had to report for a special physical examination.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00874

    Original file (ND00-00874.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00874 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000707, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. Instead, the applicant’s command approved the applicant’s request for separation in lieu of a trial by court martial under other than honorable conditions. In the applicant’s issue 2, the applicant contends that he was not offered proper counsel.

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-01102

    Original file (ND99-01102.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND99-01102 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 990812, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. I'll see you around motherfucker" or words to that effect towards Hospital Second Class M____ A. A_______, U.S.Navy.pplicant requested an administrative discharge under other than honorable conditions in lieu of a trial by court-martial. 970917: The commanding officer, exercising GCMCA, approved the request for an...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00004

    Original file (ND02-00004.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Decision A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 020517. Documentation In addition to the service record, we were unable to obtain discharge package, 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) 860620 - 870615 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 870616 Date of Discharge:...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00033

    Original file (ND03-00033.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    980407: DD Form 214: Applicant discharged under other than honorable conditions in lieu of a trial by court-martial, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-106. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged on 19980407 under other than honorable conditions in lieu of a trial by court-martial (A and B). After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00274

    Original file (ND00-00274.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00274 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 991221, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. 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).The Board found that the applicant went UA from RTC...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00500

    Original file (ND00-00500.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00500 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000314, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. I just wanted to be able to pursue my dream of becoming a police officer and to help society in helping keep law and order and peace in our country. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-01423

    Original file (ND04-01423.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND04-01423 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20040917. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. 910504: Applicant to unauthorized absence 0500, 910504.910518: Applicant from unauthorized absence 0500, 910518 (14 days/surrendered).910529: Charges preferred to special court-martial for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), Article 86 (3 specs): (1) Unauthorized...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00047

    Original file (ND99-00047.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    discharge. The Board found the applicant had requested an Administrative Discharge Board (ADB) in lieu of a Special Court Martial on 27 Feb 97 in order to avoid the possibility of a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge. Further, applicant’s submitted issue contains text admitting having been UA by stating “…I wanted out, and off of that ship.