Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00097
Original file (ND00-00097.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-AR, USN
Docket No. ND00-00097

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 991025, 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 000720. 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. My discharge was grossly inequitable because the reason for such discharge related to a civilian offense. Under dishonorable draws one to conclude I committed treason or some such instead of steal a motorcycle which I had actually bought in error.

2. Information given to the discharge review board was wrong. As indicated by the enclosed "Record of unauthorized absence" I received two 2-year sentences. I DID NOT. A moot point but fair. I received only a single 2 1/2 year sentence.

3. I was only seventeen when I inlisted. My intentions were always honorable. I simply didn't have the wisdom needed.

4. I have battered my life by having a family and going to college. See enclosed transcript. I wish to attend more college but need a General - under honorable discharge to receive the state help I want using the Hazelwood Act.

 Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
Copy of Bible Way Institute International Dean Registrar
Copy of College Transcript
Copy of Record of Unauthorized Absence
Letters from applicant (2)
Copy of DD Form 214

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: USN                        None
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     None

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 841016               Date of Discharge: 870625

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 00 08 23
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 17                          Years Contracted: 8

 Education Level: 11                        AFQT: 55

 Highest Rate: AR

 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: 10

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 :

850401:  UA 850401-850402 [1day/S].

 850429:  Applicant on unauthorized absence from VP-31 from 850429 – 850508 (9 days, apprehended).
850517:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Absent from unit 0730 850429 until 1105, 850508 [9days/A], violation of UCMJ Article 92: Violate a lawful general regulation, by wrongfully having a butterfly knife with a blade in excess of two inches in his room; violation of UCMJ Article 134: Drunk and disorderly at the enlisted club.
         Award: Correctional Custody for 30 days, forfeiture of $310.00 per month for 2 months. No indication of appeal in the record.

860203:  Report of declaration of desertion. Applicant declared a deserter 850818, having been an unauthorized absentee since 0001, 20JUL85.
870506:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under Other Than Honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to Civil conviction.
870508:          Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ, Article 27B, elected to waive all rights.
870510:  Commanding officer recommended discharge under Other Than Honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to Civil conviction.

870609:  CNMPC directed the applicant's discharge under Other Than Honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the Commission of a serious offense.
870619:  Civil conviction in Houston Texas for Grand Theft Auto
 Sentenced: Two 2 years sentence to run concurrently in Texas Department of Corrections, Harris County Jail, Houston Texas.
870625:  Discharged in Absentia.

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). 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 determined this issue is without merit. The applicant claims his discharge was inequitable because the reason was related to a civilian conviction. The applicant was properly discharged for commission of a serious civilian offense, in accordance with the military personnel manual, paragraph 3630600. Relief denied.

In the applicant’s issue 2, the Board determined this issue is without merit. The applicant states the discharge review board had wrong information, in that he received a single sentence for 2.5 years, vice two, 2 year sentences. This information may be relevant to the applicant, relative to the amount of time he will be incarcerated but it is irrelevant to execution of the discharge process. He was convicted of grand theft auto and discharged for Commission of a Serious Offense. Relief denied.

In the applicant’s issue 3, the Board determined this issue is without merit. The applicant states he was only 17. Youth and immaturity are no excuse for misconduct. The applicant was in violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) and was held accountable for his actions. Relief denied.

In the applicant’s issue 4, the Board determined this issue is without merit. The applicant claims he wants to continue his education under the Hazlewood Act, and he now has a family. The Board is under no obligation to upgrade an individual’s discharge to permit continued education. His discharge was proper and equitable and his record does not warrant relief. The applicant is encouraged to continue his personal pursuits to become a creditable member of society. Relief denied.

 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 view DoD Directive 1332.28 and other Decisional Documents by going online at " afls14.jag.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:

                  Naval Council of Personnel Boards
                  Attn: Naval Discharge Review Board
                  720 Kennon Street SE Rm 309
                  Washington Navy Yard DC 20374-5023      


Similar Decisions

  • 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 | ND00-00002

    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 | 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.

  • 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 | 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 | ND99-00426

    Original file (ND99-00426.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION Issues (verbatim) (EQUITY ISSUE) His violation of the UCMJ nothwithstanding, this former member opines that his otherwise creditable service period is sufficient to warrant separation under honorable condition.2. 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. 20310-1809The names, and votes of the members of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00414

    Original file (ND04-00414.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. After a thorough review of the 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. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant’s DD Form 214 Statement...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-01300

    Original file (ND02-01300.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.861030: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence from 0345 –0414, 861020. 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, (Equity Issue; as it pertains to post-service conduct) the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00859

    Original file (ND01-00859.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-MSSR, USN Docket No. ND01-00859 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010615, 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:None PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00802

    Original file (ND99-00802.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND99-00802 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 990524, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. Age at Entry: 18 Years Contracted: 4 Education Level: 12 AFQT: 35 Highest Rate: HN Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks): Performance: 2.73 (3) Behavior: 2.60 (3) OTA: 3.33 Military Decorations: None Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: MUC Days of Unauthorized Absence: None Character, Narrative...