Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00752
Original file (ND00-00752.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-SN, USN
Docket No. ND00-00752

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 000530, 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 001214. 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 1910 - 142 (formerly 3630605).

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues (verbatim)

 1. I fill that my discharge is inadequate, because after serving 42 months in the military I should have at least received a general under honorable discharge also the day that I was released. I had put in for a six month releasal on that same date three months prior. Which in all actualality a six months releaseal would put me at Dec. 26 1997 if entered into the military on June 26, 1994. So Dec. 26, 1997 would have been my separation date instead of Jan. Also my eval upon separation should show that I was not bad sailor I just made juvenile mistakes and had decisions in my life.

 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)     931214 - 940626  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 940627               Date of Discharge: 980126

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 03 07 00
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 17                          Years Contracted: 4 (12 months extension)

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 47

 Highest Rate: SN

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.00 (1)    Behavior: 3.00 (1)                OTA: 3 .00

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM, NAVY"E"RIBBON (2), SSDR, AFEM

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 1910-142 (formerly 3630605).

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

941023:  Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (Violation of UCMJ, Article as listed: Article 86 x 2 Unauthorized Absence, Article 92 x 2 Failure to obey Order of Regulation, Article 90 Disobeying a Commissioned Officer), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

950127:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 134: False Military I.D.Card on 941228.
         Award: Forfeiture of $200.00 pay per month for 1 month, restriction and extra duty for 30 days. No indication of appeal in the record.

970824:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86 (4 Specs), UA from unit, to wit: USS RAINIER Training Detachment.
         Award: Forfeiture of $500.00 pay per month for 1 month (suspended for 6 months), extra duty for 30 days. No indication of appeal in the record.

971001:  Vacated prior suspended forfeiture $500.00 pay per month for 1 month from CO's NJP 970801 based on continued misconduct.
         
971002:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86 (7 Specs), UA from unit, to wit: USS RAINIER.
         Award: Forfeiture of $500.00 pay per month for 1 month (suspended for 6 months), restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to E-2 (suspended for 6 months) . No indication of appeal in the record.

971117:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 107: False official statement.
         Award: Forfeiture of $500.00 per month for 1 month (suspended for 6 months), reduction to E-1 (suspended for 6 months). No indication of appeal in the record.

971117:  Vacated prior punishment suspended at CO's NJP held 970919 due to continued misconduct.

971119:  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 CO's NJP of 971114 for violation of the UCMJ, Article 107, false official statements, and CO's NJP of 950127, Article 134, false pass offense, and misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct, as evidenced by CO's NJP of 971114, 970919, 970801, and 950127.
971124:          Applicant advised of his rights and having elected to consult consulted 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.
971231:  Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense as evidenced by CO's NJP of 971114 for violation of the UCMJ, Article 107, false official statements, and CO's NJP of 950127, Article 134, false pass offense, and misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct, as evidenced by CO's NJP of 971114, 970919, 970801, and 950127.

980115:  Commander, Naval Surface Group Pacific Northwest authorized 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 980126 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 the applicant’s issue, the Board found nothing in the records, nor did the applicant provide anything to indicate or to show that there exists an error of fact, law, procedure, or discretion associated with his discharge at the time of its issuance, and that his rights were prejudiced thereby. Furthermore, there has been no change in policy by the Navy, or higher authority, made expressly retroactive to the type of discharge received by the applicant. The Board recognizes that serving in the Navy is very challenging to both the Sailor and his family members. Our country is fortunate to have men and women willing to endure the hardships and make the sacrifices required to serve their country. It must be noted that most Sailors serve honorably and well, and therefore, earn their honorable discharges. The applicant's service is accurately characterized as having been performed under other than honorable conditions. Relief is 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 (E). 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. 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 15560C), Change 18, effective
12 Dec 97 until 29 March 2000, Article 1910-142 [formerly 3630605]. SEPARATION BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT- COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE .

B. In Appendix 12 of the Manual for Courts-Martial, a punitive discharge is authorized for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Article 107, for false official statement, 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 | ND01-00702

    Original file (ND01-00702.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00702 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010430, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable and the reason for the discharge be changed to convenience of the government. No indication of appeal in the record.980126: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge general (under honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense as evidenced by your CO's NJP on...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00072

    Original file (ND04-00072.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND04-00072 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20031014. The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review. I feel that was would have received a honorable discharge if I wouldn't have received this type of embarrassing treatment by the US Navy.

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600542

    Original file (MD0600542.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). Applicant chose not to make a statement.961120: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Specification: In that SNM (Applicant), did, on or about 961111, at 0400, violate a written order, to wit: MCO 1020.34F, in that he returned to base with an earring in his ear. The basis for this recommendation is [Applicant’s] discreditable involvement...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00213

    Original file (ND00-00213.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION Award: Forfeiture of $300 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to SR. No indication of appeal in the record.971117: 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 service record entries, misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct as evidenced by all punishments under the UCMJ in...

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600657

    Original file (MD0600657.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant’s DD Form 215Applicant’s DD Form 214 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USMCR (DEP) 19910815 - 19920707 COG Active: 19920708 – 19960111 HON Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 19960112 Date of Discharge: 19980728 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active:...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500283

    Original file (ND0500283.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION Despite their hardships, these sailors are still able to serve honorably and therefore earn their honorable discharges.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00257

    Original file (ND02-00257.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 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: USNR(DEP) 950824 - 951204 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 951205 Date of Discharge: 971104 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 01 11 00 Inactive: None 971020: Commanding Officer recommended...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00411

    Original file (ND00-00411.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MM1 (applicant) went to CO's NJP on board USS MCKEE (AS-41) 96NOV27, for Article 107, false official statement to XO, USS MCKEE, regarding his alleged affair with SK3 H_ and the adultery charge. In the applicant’s issue 3, the Board found that the applicant’s Commanding Officer has the authority to recommend administrative separation for any individual in his command who had committed misconduct. This is a non-decisional issue for the Board.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00624

    Original file (ND00-00624.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. Applicant refused non-judicial punishment.981008: Vacate suspended reduction to HN awarded at CO's NJP of 8Jun98 due to continued misconduct.981020: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge general (under honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00283

    Original file (ND04-00283.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND04-00283 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20031202. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. “So that I can join the reserves my discharge was unjust.” Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Copies of DD Form 214 (2) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service...