Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00888
Original file (ND99-00888.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-SN, USN
Docket No. ND99-00888

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 990616, 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 a representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 000323. 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

 I missed a ship’s movement due to an auto mishap. This occurred in Dec 88. While awaiting for the resolution of the auto accident, I was away from base with a friend. My friend got into an altercation with a civilian. I attempted to break up the fight. I was unjustly accused of being involved in the fight and I was imprisoned in a civilian jail. Due to this confinement, I was confined for 3 weeks. I was never given an opportunity to state what actually happened in my own words. Please upgrade the discharge to General Under Honorable Conditions. My prior Naval Record was very positive. I was proud to serve in the US Navy. I am attempting to receive a General Under Honorable Conditions Discharge.
Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
Copy of DD Form 214.

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     861024 - 861102  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 861103               Date of Discharge: 900222

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 02 08 03
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 20                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 27

 Highest Rate: SN

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 2.70 (2)    Behavior: 2.70 (2)                OTA : 2.70

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: None

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: 224

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/Misconduct – commission of a serious offense(convicted by civil court), NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

890523:  Circuit Court of the City of Norfolk finds Applicant guilty of Robbery by force and Malicious Wounding.

890706:  Applicant sentenced to six (6) years in the Virginia Penitentiary for Robbery. Applicant sentenced to ten (10) years probation following release from prison for Robbery by force.

890825:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense as evidenced by conviction of Robbery by Force and Malicious wounding.
890829:          Applicant advised of his rights and having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to appear before an Administrative Discharge Board.
890915:  An Administrative Discharge Board, based upon a preponderance of the evidence and by unanimous vote, found that the applicant had committed a serious offense, that the misconduct warranted separation, and recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions.

891010:  Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.

891114:  CNMPC directed the applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense (Civilian Conviction).

891226:  TPU Norfolk VA requests authority to discharge applicant in absentia in accordance with CNMPC directive 891114 due to applicant’s incarceration.

900207:  CNMPC directs discharge of applicant in absentia due to incarceration.  

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 900222 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).

In the applicant’s issue 1, the Board found the issue without merit. The applicant was properly discharged in absentia due civilian conviction. The NDRB found no injustice to occurred in the applicant’s discharge. Relief not warranted.

 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 15560A), Change 8, effective
21 Aug 89 until 14 Aug 91, 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 | ND00-00097

    Original file (ND00-00097.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Information given to the discharge review board was wrong. As indicated by the enclosed "Record of unauthorized absence" I received two 2-year sentences. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 870625 under Other Than Honorable conditions for misconduct due to Commission of a Serious Offense (A).

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00712

    Original file (ND02-00712.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00712 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020429, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions. Please consider my request open-minded because there were more circumstances than are listed on my service records. Violation of UCMJ, Article 128: Assault on another person on 890911.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00455

    Original file (ND00-00455.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00455 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000229, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. This is not an issue for which the Board will grant relief.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00252

    Original file (ND04-00252.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to uncharacterized. The Applicant requests a documentary record review. 010906: An Administrative Discharge Board, based upon a preponderance of the evidence and by unanimous vote, found that the Applicant had committed a serious offense, that the misconduct warranted separation, and recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00070

    Original file (ND01-00070.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :841211: Applicant ordered to active duty for 36 months under the Active Mariner Program.850905: Special Court Martial Charge I: violation of the UCMJ, Article 86 (2 specifications): Specification 1: Unauthorized absence 0730, 1Jul85 to 1929, 6Jul85 (5 days/surrendered). PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged in absentia on 870717 under other than honorable conditions for...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00792

    Original file (ND02-00792.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant's current enlistment DD Form 214 (2) Applicant's previous enlistment DD Form 214 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 761222 - 770530 COG USNR (DEP) 820610 - 820616 COG Active: USN 770531 - 810530 HON Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 820617 Date of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00503

    Original file (ND04-00503.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    D_ N_ (Applicant)” 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: None Active: None Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 880725 Date of Discharge: 900424 Length of Service (years, months, days): Active: 01 08 29 Inactive: 00 04 22 Age at Entry: 18 Years Contracted: 8...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00174

    Original file (ND01-00174.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The record also reflects the FSM's period of active service was honorable, with the only blemish being the civil conviction. He was afforded all of his applicable rights per reference (a), including the right to an Administrative Board, which was conducted on 12 February 1996. based on the offenses committed, and the recommendations of the Administrative Board, it is recommended that BM2 (applicant) be separated from the naval service with an Other Than Honorable Discharge. It was caused...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00614

    Original file (ND04-00614.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    900102: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86 (Charge I): Unauthorized absence (three specifications). Charged 6 days leave.900731: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86 (Specification): Unauthorized absence from 0930, 900712 until on or about 0334, 900713.Charge II: Violation of the UCMJ, Article 134: Dereliction in the performance of duties (negligence), failed to perform duties as a member of Duty Section I. I recommend that AA G_ (Applicant) be separated from the naval service with a...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00392

    Original file (ND00-00392.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION 880525: Applicant to unauthorized absence 0600, 25May88.880527: CNMPC directed the applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.880621: CNMPC authorized discharge of applicant without return to military control. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 880628 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct...