Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00658
Original file (ND00-00658.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-ABHAN, USN
Docket No. ND00-00658

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 000424, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions. The applicant requested a personal appearance hearing before the Board in the Washington National Capital region. The applicant listed the Veterans of Foreign Wars as his representative on the DD Form 293. In the acknowledgement letter to the applicant, the applicant was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 001206. 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, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.



PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues (verbatim)

1. My separation from the U.S.Military was done by Administrative Board. 5 charges were brought against me in this Action
Charge 1 - theft second degree - state of Washington
See Document #1
Charge #2 - Assault D.V. #4
See Document #2
Charge #3 - Worthless checks
See Document #3
Charge #4 - Article 112(A)
Charge #5 - U.C.M.J. - Fighting

2. I am writing to you hoping to receive a discharge up-grade. I accept responsibility for my actions - I have spent the last 5 years trying to right many wrongs. Enclosed are some of the document's pertaining to the issues that were used to discharge me from the Armed Service's.

Charge #1
Theft 2 nd - State of Washington
I have had this matter dismissed from my record and I wish to have this matter not held against me.

Charge #2
Simple Assault DV #4
This charge was also used against me by the Government. This matter has also been dismissed by the civilian court. See Document #2.

Charge #3 Worthless Checks
The matter has been paid off. See Document #3

Charge #4
Violation U.C.M.J.
Article 112-A

I was retained on active duty after this matter. Subsequently had taken many more urine exams on active duty never had a problem before or after.

Charge #5
Fighting violation U.C.M.J.

Charges stem from an incident involving many people. The matter involved nothing more than a small fine at N.J.P.

I wish for the board to look at my documents and statement in reviewing these matters. Issues #4 and #5 were in my service record and therefore used against me. I am not pointing the finger at any-one but myself. I am trying to close this dark chapter in my life. My loyalty the U.S. Navy and it's mission were always #1 in my book. My problems were personnel not military orientated. I lost focus on what was going on in my life, and it snow-balled out of control, by the time it was under control it was to late. I was told that I needed to wait 5 yrs before applying for an up-grade review. I hope that you will entertain my case with an open mind. Thank you very much for your time.

 3. Request applicant's discharge be upgraded based on post-service conduct and previous honorable service.

Applicant performed as an above average Sailor while assigned duties within his rating. He had completed one enlistment honorably in 1986. His awards of the Navy Expeditionary Medal, Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal, and the Southwest Asia Medal w/l bronze star attest to his satisfactory performance when sent in harms way.

The applicant accepts responsibility for his actions and blames no one but himself. He expresses remorse for his actions and continues to hold the U.S. Navy in high regard.

The applicant has completed all of his obligations to the civilian courts. In response to a request for donations, the applicant readily donated clothing to the S.A.F.E. of Harlett County, NC (Sexual Assault and Family Emergency). He has also donated to the Greenhouse Runaway Shelter Sumter County SC, thus contributing to the care for homeless, runaway, pushouts, throwaways, and abused and neglected youth.

The applicant displays a professional and gracious attitude. He has proven himself an articulate, hard working, team player who is a pleasure to be around. A co-worker (Major, USAF, Ret) describes him as honest and possesses the highest moral character.

We refer this case to the Board for their careful and compassionate consideration and request the applicant's discharge be reviewed for clemency based on post-service conduct and previous honorable service to his country.

Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
Police record check dated August 10, 2000 (2 copies)
Donors Official Receipt from United Way dated June 14, 2000 (2 copies)
Character reference dated June 6, 2000 (2 copies)
Letter from applicant dated April 20, 2000
Copy of DD Form 214
Copy of certificate and order of discharge court paper date stamped October 7, 1999
SEATAC Municipal Court Docket (2 pages)
AAFES Collection Assistance Department letter dated July 13, 1999
Copy of previous enlisted DD Form 214
Receipt for charitable contributions to Santee Baptist Association, Crisis Closet dated May 4, 1998
Receipt for charitable contributions to S.A.F.E. Harnett County dated March 6, 1997
Letter from Greenhouse Run-A-Way Shelter Sumter County dated March 4, 1998
Character reference dated May 19, 2000
Character reference from USAF, Major, Ret. undated

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: USN      R-R               831227 - 861226  HON
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     830718 - 831226  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 880725               Date of Discharge: 940324

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 05 08 00
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 23                          Years Contracted: 6

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 52/66

 Highest Rate: ABH2

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.58 (10)   Behavior: 3.22 (10)               OTA: 3.64

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM, SSDR (2), SASM with Bronze Star, OSR (2)
Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

880725:  Applicant enlisted for 6 years after a break in service.

 891221:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 112A: Wrongful use of a controlled substance.
         Award: Forfeiture of $468 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to ABHAN. No indication of appeal in the record.
910121:  Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (Failure to pay just due debts in a timely manner.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.
        
910722:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 128: Unlawfully grab a shipmate by the throat with his hands and choke him and unlawfully strike him in the upper body with his fist and in the back of his head.
         Award: Forfeiture of $200 per month for 2 months, reduction to ABHAN. Reduction suspended for 6 months. No indication of appeal in the record.
910722:  Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (Your violation of the UCMJ, Article 128, in that you assaulted a shipmate by grabbing him by the throat and stuck him in the upper body and in the back of his head on 25 June 1991.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.
        
920805:  Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (Failure to pay just debts in a timely manner.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.
        
930318:  Civil Conviction: Sea Tac Municipal Court, Sea Tac, WA for violation of domestic violence; 4 th degree assault at Sea Tac
 Sentence: Fine $250.00, jail for 90 days. Jail for 88 days suspended.
931124:  Civil Conviction: Port Orchard Superior Court, Port Orchard, WA for violation of theft 2 nd degree.
 Sentence: Fine $1400.00, Jail in 30 days, supervised probation for 12 months. Jail for 28 days converted to 28 days community service.
940112:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense, civilian conviction, and drug abuse.
940112:          Applicant advised of his rights and having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to appear before an Administrative Discharge Board.
940124:  An Administrative Discharge Board, based upon a preponderance of the evidence and by unanimous vote, found that the applicant had committed a serious offense and civilian conviction, that the misconduct warranted separation, and recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions.
940223:  Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offenses, civilian conviction and drug abuse.

940311:  BUPERS 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 940324 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (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 response to applicant’s issues 1 and 2, the Board found, after reviewing the applicant’s record, that the applicant was discharged under other than honorable conditions for a commission of a serious offense. Even though the applicant states that his civilian convictions have been dismissed, the applicant still committed a serious offense by violating UCMJ Article 112A for wrongful use of a controlled substance and violation of UCMJ Article 128 for assault. The NDRB sees no reason to change the applicant’s discharge based on these issues.

In issue 3, the applicant’s representative requests the applicant’s discharge be upgraded based on post-service conduct and previous honorable service. The Board took into consideration the applicant’s complete service record and post-service conduct. However, the applicant’s numerous cases of misconduct outweigh the merits of his military service and post-service conduct. 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, is considered. The applicant's efforts need to be more encompassing than those provided. The applicant should have produced evidence of continuing educational pursuits, a verifiable employment record, more documentation of community service other than donations, and proof of his not using drugs in order for consideration for clemency based on post-service conduct. At this time the applicant has not provided sufficient documentation of good character and conduct. Therefore no relief will be granted. He is encouraged to continue with his pursuits and is reminded that he is eligible for a personal appearance hearing provided the application is received within 15 years from the date of discharge. Relief denied.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

 A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 5, effective
05 Mar 93 until 21 Jul 94, 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 128, for assault, 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 | 2001_Navy | ND01-00196

    Original file (ND01-00196.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION 961030: An Administrative Discharge Board, based upon a preponderance of the evidence and by unanimous vote, found that the applicant had committed misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct, commission of a serious offense and civilian conviction, that the misconduct warranted separation, and recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00504

    Original file (ND99-00504.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    920323: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of alcohol abuse subsequent to inpatient treatment within the last 12 months. No indication of appeal in the record.920514: BUPERS directed the applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense. You may obtain a copy of DoD Directive 1332.28 by writing to: DA Military Review Boards...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00331

    Original file (ND03-00331.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Thank you, A_ E_ V_ S_ (Applicant) The Applicant has not provided any documentation for the Board to consider.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600516

    Original file (ND0600516.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable or general (under honorable conditions). The NDRB advised the Applicant that it normally first conducts a documentary record discharge review and that he would still be eligible for a personal appearance hearing if he requested one within 15 years from his discharge date. Relief is not warranted.The Applicant requested that the Board upgrade his characterization of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00183

    Original file (ND03-00183.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    My life was robbed because T_ F_ and J_ W_ didn’t’ like Hispanics.” 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): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 860130 - 860223 COG Active: None Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 860224 Date of Discharge: 890301 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 03 00...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01347

    Original file (ND03-01347.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-01347 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030808. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The applicant’s representative submitted the following as issue 2: (EQUITY ISSUE) This former member further requests that the Board include provisions of SECNAVINST 5420.174C., enclosure (1), Chapter 9, as it pertains to post-service conduct, in assessing the merits of his application.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00182

    Original file (ND01-00182.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In the acknowledgement letter to the applicant, the applicant was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing. 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’s first issue states: “Being held past my EAOS, I was processed for termination from service as...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00493

    Original file (ND00-00493.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00493 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 991214, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable, general/under honorable conditions or entry level separation or uncharacterized and the reason for the discharge be changed to economic reasons. With his violation of the page 13 warning, GSMFN (applicant) left this command with no other alternate to processing him for administrative separation, and I know of no...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00317

    Original file (ND04-00317.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND04-00317 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20031210. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. In the acknowledgement letter, the Applicant was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing, also advised that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) does not travel, all hearing are held in the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00863

    Original file (ND00-00863.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-MSSN, USN Docket No. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 (2 copies) USS HARLAN COUNTY's discharge recommendation dtd 8 Jul 92 Certificate of Completion of the Petty Officer Indoctrination Course dtd 30 Jun 91 Applicant's Enlisted Performance Record (NAVPERS 1070/609) Applicant's...