Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-01170
Original file (ND99-01170.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-AR, USN
Docket No. ND99-01170

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 990826, 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 000522. 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

 Prior to the documentary discharge review, the applicant introduced no issues as block 8 on the DD Form 293 is blank.

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)     870110 - 870127  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 870128               Date of Discharge: 880203

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 01 00 06
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 24                          Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 42

 Highest Rate: AA

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: NOB                  Behavior: NOB             OTA: NOB

Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: None

Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

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 :

871009:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Failure to obey a lawful general order. Article 1136, U.S. Navy Regulations by wrongfully having in his possession, dangerous weapons and explosives (1) ARMI F. III TANFOGLIO-GARDONE V.T.-Italy, MOD. GT380 CAL. .380 ACP Serial T46012 Semi-Automatic Pistol, (2) 1 clip, containing seven rounds of .380 Automatic AMMO, (3) box of CCI OMARK INDUSTRY BLAZER .380 Automatic AMMO containing 29 rounds of AMMO, (4) INGRAM M10A1 CAL. 9MM, .45 A.C.P. Military Armanent Corp. Serial ES0434, Semi Automatic Pistol, (5) clip for M10A1, containing 34 rounds of 9MM BALL AMMO, (6) 1 box containing 16 rounds of 9MM CAL. 115 GR. BALL AMMO, (7) 14 rounds of .380 Automatic AMMO.
         Award: Forfeiture of $200.00 per month for 2 months, reduction to E-1. No indication of appeal in the record.
880111:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.
880111:          Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult 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 and the right to submit statement on own behalf either verbally or in writing before an Administrative Board or in writing if an Administrative Board is not convened.
880114:  Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.

880118:  CNMPC directed the applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 880203 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.

 Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

 A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560A), effective 15 Jun 87 until
10 Jan 89, Article 3630600, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED MEMBERS 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 | ND00-00851

    Original file (ND00-00851.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The next day I was sent to a Court Martial, which resulted in 30 days in brig and $600 x 2 for the ammo and did not discharge me at that time. The next day I was sent to a Court Martial, which resulted in 30 days in brig and $600 x 2 for the ammo and did not discharge me at that time. I want a personal hearing on this matter.” The NDRB found no impropriety or inequity in the applicant’s discharge.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-01231

    Original file (ND02-01231.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    No indication of appeal in the record.871104: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of two serious offenses as evidenced by a violation of UCMJ Article 134, Wrongfully sitting down on post and by a violation of UCMJ Article 128, Assault. 880125: Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27(b), elected to waive all rights...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00951

    Original file (ND00-00951.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 Three pages from applicant's service record PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: USNR (DEP) 880831 - 881113 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 881114 Date of Discharge: 890530 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 00 06 17 Inactive:...

  • 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 | 2001_Navy | ND01-00206

    Original file (ND01-00206.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00206 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 001207, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to Honorable. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 Service Related Documents (48pgs) Medical Related Documents (2pgs). The applicant did not provide any of these documents.

  • 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 | 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 | 1999_Navy | ND99-00949

    Original file (ND99-00949.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The discharge shall remain: UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL)/Misconduct – commission of a serious offense, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600. 900718: CNMPC directed the applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 900731 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to commission...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-01084

    Original file (ND01-01084.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-SWCA, USN Docket No. ND01-01084 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010814, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 910524 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00509

    Original file (ND99-00509.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The discharge shall remain: UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/Misconduct – commission of a serious offense, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600. After completing 90 days was offered to complete a program and return to active duty. 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.