Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00326
Original file (ND00-00326.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-SA, USN
Docket No. ND00-00326

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 000112, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to General/under Honorable conditions and the reason for the discharge be changed to misconduct. 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 000817. 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 and reason for 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. The discharge is inequitable because it was based on an unfair misrepresentation of my character. My service record represents me as lazy and unproductive, yet it does not include my letters of congratulations and "frocking" from my CO which I included as Document #1, nor does it include my certificate of completion as a petty officer which is document #2. Nor does my service record indicate that I successfully "struck" from the rate of Boatswain's Mate seaman to the rate of operations specialist 3 rd class petty officer. The CO of my ship USS SAN JACINTO (Capt P_ E_) personally stopped me in the hall of the mess decks of my ship and shook my hand, saying that was a real achievement and not to give up too much credit for it since I had done it all by myself. I worked hard to get that promotion, and that was not lazy and unproductive, as my service record indicates. The officers involved in my discharge misrepresented the facts or at least omitted certain facts which would have made a difference, I believe. It deserves reconsideration (please.)
At the time of discharge, I was only 21 years old, and I wanted to get out of the Navy, because I had realized that the Navy was not what I wanted to do as a career, so I did not fight the discharge. I only wanted to go home. But now I am 29 years old and I want a career as a professional law enforcement officer. I have completed the Mississippi Law Enforcement Academy and I have also completed a Bachelor's degree in Criminal Justice from the University of Southern Mississippi. The state of MS will not certify me as a law enforcement officer unless my discharge can be changed to at least "general". I have included copies of my diploma and certificates from the Academy as Document #3. I am not asking for a miracle, I know what I did was wrong, but it has been 8 years and I have been a very productive citizen since. I was not treated fairly then. I ask for reconsideration so that I may obtain significant employment and move on with my life after 8 years. In light of my post-service achievements, and all the good I will be able to do as an officer. Law Enforcement is the most important thing in my life. I care more abut law enforcement and want to be in it more than anything else in the world. I am very serious and very dedicated to law enforcement. I know that law enforcement is what I was put on this earth by God to do. I love it so much that I would do it for free in fact I have. I volunteered my services as a volunteer deputy sheriff in Lamar County, MS for a whole year while I was attending criminal justice classes in college. That year was from December 1995 to January 1996. I gave it up because I needed to work part time and because I needed more time to study. The whole four years that I was in college, I never thought that my military background might prevent me from becoming a law enforcement officer. For the past 5 years I have struggled to prepare for a career in law enforcement, by completing a Bachelor's degree in Criminal Justice and by paying my own way to the police academy and graduating from it to make myself a more attractive employee to potential employers in law enforcement. The only thing that stands between me & my happiness is this discharge, which stemmed from an incident I was involved in when I was only 21 - eight years ago. Please don't make me pay for the rest of my life for something I did when I was just a kid. I have changed totally since that time of my life. I am truly trying to make something of myself and I know that law enforcement is the vehicle that will allow me to reach my true potential and do the most good for other people at the same time. Please let me start over in life. Please reconsider in light of my achievements an upgrade. Very respectfully

P.S. Please be advised that I am willing to do anything, anything, anything to get this upgrade to a general discharge. I would be very happy to meet any conditions, terms or guidelines that you specify. I know that there is a way to do this, and if I just keep trying, eventually, I will be successful. In the meantime, I will be working part-time and attending graduate school and otherwise staying productive.

 Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
Copy of DD Form 214 (2 copies)
 Copy of Certificate of Completion dated June 25, 1991
Copy of authority to assume the title and wear the uniform of an operations specialist third class petty officer dated September 17, 1991
Copy of Degree of Bachelor Arts dated August 6, 1999
Copy of certificate of completion dated July 13, 1999
Copy of certificate of completion dated July 30, 1999
Copy of certificate of completion dated July 22, 1999
Copy of certificate of completion dated July 30, 1999
Copy of certificate of completion dated July 2, 1999
Copy of certificate of completion dated August 27, 1995
Copy of certificate of completion dated July 30, 1999
Copy of certificate of completion dated July 30, 1999
Character reference dated March 17, 2000

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: None
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     890321 - 890416  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 890417               Date of Discharge: 920102

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 02 08 16
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 18                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 10                        AFQT: 78/77

 Highest Rate: SN

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.10 (2)    Behavior: 3.10 (2)                OTA : 3.10

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: SSR, NUC, NDM, SASM with 2 Bronze Stars

 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 :

910201:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 91: Disrespect toward a petty officer on 20Jan91, violation of UCMJ Article 134: Loitering on post (lookout) on 20Jan91.
         Award: Bread and water for 3 days. No indication of appeal in the record.
910718:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 121: Larceny of credit cards.
         Award: Reduction suspended for 2 months, advancement suspended for 2 months, $502.00 of 1/2 PPM suspended and applicant directed to remit to First USA bank NLT 18Sep91 $502.00, restriction and extra duty for 45 days.
911127:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 113: Misbehavior of a sentinel.
         Award: Forfeiture of $150 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 30 days, reduction to SA. No indication of appeal in the record. [Extracted from Commanding Officer’s message dated, 12DEC91.
911216:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under Other Than Honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the Commission of a serious offense.
911216:          Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ, Article 27B, elected to waive all rights .

911216:  Commanding officer recommended discharge under Other Than Honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the Commission of a serious offense.

911220:  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 920102 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 states he was only 21 at the time of his misconduct and wanted to get out of the Navy. He earned a B.A. degree in law enforcement, completed the Mississippi Law Enforcement Academy and wants a career in law enforcement, but can’t be certified with an Other Than Honorable discharge. Youth and immaturity are not sufficient excuses for misconduct. Although the applicant wants a career in law enforcement, the Board is under no obligation to upgrade his discharge for the purpose of obtaining desired employment. The applicant committed violations of the UCMJ that were heinous and malicious. The punishment he received for his misconduct was proper and equitable. The applicant provided some documentation to show he is attempting to establish a reputation of good character and conduct, but continuing education alone is not sufficient achievement to warrant recharacterization of his discharge. The discharge was proper and equitable. Relief denied.

The following is provided for the benefit of the applicant. There is no law or regulation that provides for the upgrade of an unfavorable discharge based solely on the passage of time or good conduct, subsequent to leaving military service. The NDRB reviews the propriety (did the Navy follow its own rules in processing the applicant for discharge) and equity (did the applicant receive a discharge characterization in keeping with Navy guidance or was the characterization typical of other service members being separated for the same reason) of each applicant’s discharge to determine if proper procedures were followed. This applicant’s discharge was proper and equitable . Additionally, the NDRB is authorized to award clemency for post-service factors (what has the applicant done since discharge to become a contributing member of his/her community and to society in general). Those factors include but are not limited to the following: Evidence of continuing educational pursuits (transcripts, diploma, degree or vocational-technical certificates), a verifiable employment history (letter of recommendation from employer), documentation of community service (letter from activity/community group), certificate of non-involvement with civil authorities (police records check) and proof of not using drugs (detoxification certificate). The applicant did not provide sufficient documentation to demonstrate good character and conduct. The applicant is encouraged to continue to establish a reputation of good character and document his accomplishments. Documentation to support any claim of good character is a must to receive any consideration based on post-service achievements . The applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, to discuss his post-service accomplishments, provided an application is received by the NDRB within fifteen years from the date of his discharge. Legal representation at the hearing is advisable.

 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. Under the Manual for Courts-Martial, a punitive discharge is authorized for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Article 91, for disrespect towards a superior Petty Officer; Article 113, for misbehavior of a sentinel; Article 134, for loitering on post; and Article 121, for larceny, if adjudged at a Special or General Court-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 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 | 2004_Navy | ND04-00999

    Original file (ND04-00999.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION You may view DoD Directive 1332.28 and other Decisional Documents by going online at “ http://Boards.law.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: Secretary of the Navy Council of...

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00785

    Original file (MD02-00785.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD02-00785 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020509, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. To Discharge Review Board. st Marine Division] directed the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01063

    Original file (ND03-01063.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-01063 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030528. this was a great family building process and with our children being included they are really proud of their work.- I believe that I have shown what good post-service behavior is, I am managing to work a full-time job, 2 part-time jobs, attending classes and seminars, teaching classes, building a home and raising a family. 880427: Applicant to unauthorized absence 0700, 880427.880504: Commanding...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00900

    Original file (ND00-00900.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Believe it or not, I was discharged anyway. Chief E_ asked me about the situation. After a review of the Former Service Members (FSM) DD Form 293 Application for the Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the Armed Forces of the United States and all of the evidence assembled for review, we continue to support the corrective action as requested by the FSM of an upgrade of her Under Other Than Honorable discharge to Honorable.Enclosed within the records is a four page statement from the FSM,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00601

    Original file (ND03-00601.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Decision A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20040128. 920211: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 112A: Wrongful use of marijuana on 920117. The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of discharge.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00676

    Original file (ND00-00676.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I am trying to get back into the service, attend college, straighten out my life, but for past two months I haven't gone far. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Letters from Applicant (2) Photograph Copies of DD Form 214 (2) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: USN None Inactive: USNR (DEP) 990204 - 990217 COG Period of Service...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00874

    Original file (ND04-00874.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND04-00874 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20040503. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. I believe all of my requests should be honored, especially the removal of an assault conviction from my record.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00132

    Original file (ND02-00132.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Sincerly Yours.After a review of the Former Service Members (FSM) DD Form 293 Application for the Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the Armed Forces of the United States and all of the evidence assembled for review, we continue to note the request of the FSM of a change of the narrative reason for separation of MISCONDUCT. On his personal statement the FSM notes restitution was made on the "bad check" as directed by his C.O. Restitution was made by the FSM in a very timely fashion, his...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01047

    Original file (ND03-01047.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-01047 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030528. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. US Navy (Assault & Misconduct Discharge) I enlisted in the Navy in 2001.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00492

    Original file (ND00-00492.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The first job was a security job with Royal Guard Security. The Board found that the applicant’s misconduct was significant and warranted an other than honorable discharge. In addition, the applicant was only 9 months out of the service when he submitted his application.