Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00849
Original file (ND00-00849.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-FR, USN
Docket No. ND00-00849

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 000627, 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 010111. 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.

The NDRB did note an administrative error on the original DD Form 214. Block 28, Narrative Reason for Separation should read: “Commission of a Serious Military Offense” vice “Pattern of Misconduct”. The original DD Form 214 should be corrected or reissued as appropriate.





PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues
1. I'm trying to get a upgrade on my discharge, for I can receive a correctional officer license, I will like to be able to better take care of my four kids and wife, with a better paying job. I'm now working for Henry County Road & Bridge as a dump trunk driver but I'm barely making ends meet. So if you can help me out with a better discharge I can better take care of my family.
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)     860929 - 861202  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 861203               Date of Discharge: 880229

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 00 06 23
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 19                          Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 24

 Highest Rate: FR

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: NMA                  Behavior: NMA             OTA: NMA

Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: None

Days of Unauthorized Absence: 183

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 :

870818:  Report of Declaration of Deserter (NAVPERS 1600-3). Applicant declared a deserter on 870504 having been an unauthorized absentee since 2400, 870404 from COMFLETRAGRU WESTPAC YOKOSUKA JA.

871005:  Report of Return of Deserter. Applicant apprehended by civil authorities on 871004 (1355) at LABELLE, FL. Returned to military control 871004 (1406). Orig retained custody pending transfer to NAVABSCOLLU SAN FRANCISCO CA FFT TRANSITPERSU TREASURE ISLAND CA FOR DISCIPLINARY ACT/DISPO.
871117:  Special Court Martial for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: UA from 870404 to 871004 [183days/A].
Sent: Confinement for 75 days, forfeiture of $483.00 per month for 3 months.
CA(871216) Approved and ordered executed.
871117:  Joined NAVSTA BRIG, for confinement.

871205:  From confinement.
871209:  TRANSIENT PERSONNEL UNIT notified applicant of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious military offense as evidenced by results of SPCM of 871117 for unauthorized absence of 183 days.
871209:          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.
871214:  Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious military offense.

880216:  CNMPC directed the applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 880229 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’s issue states: “I'm trying to get a upgrade on my discharge, for I can receive a correctional officer license, I will like to be able to better take care of my four kids and wife, with a better paying job. I'm now working for Henry County Road & Bridge as a dump trunk driver but I'm barely making ends meet. So if you can help me out with a better discharge I can better take care of my family.” The NDRB found no impropriety or inequity in the discharge as issued. Further, the applicant failed to provide any post service documentation for the Board’s consideration. Relief is not warranted.
The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the re characterization of a discharge. 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. 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, 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 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 | 2002_Navy | ND02-00334

    Original file (ND02-00334.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00334 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020128, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The Applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. When I approach the base and told the watch duty Officer whom I was, immediately I was detained and waiting for someone to come a verify my status and take me to the barracks.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00689

    Original file (ND02-00689.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. 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): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 861224 - 870211 COG Active: USN None Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 870212 Date of Discharge: 880919 Length of Service (years, months,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-01017

    Original file (ND00-01017.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 At this time, the applicant has not provided any documentation of good character and conduct.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00174

    Original file (ND01-00174.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The record also reflects the FSM's period of active service was honorable, with the only blemish being the civil conviction. He was afforded all of his applicable rights per reference (a), including the right to an Administrative Board, which was conducted on 12 February 1996. based on the offenses committed, and the recommendations of the Administrative Board, it is recommended that BM2 (applicant) be separated from the naval service with an Other Than Honorable Discharge. It was caused...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00919

    Original file (ND02-00919.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant's DD Form 214 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 960125 -...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00357

    Original file (ND01-00357.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00357 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010126, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. I wish you would change my discharge so it will make me feel better about myself, and for future jobs. Relief is not warranted.The applicant takes issue with being processed for wrongful use of controlled substance without a “piss test.” The Board found this issue without merit.

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00006

    Original file (ND99-00006.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND99-00006 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 980928, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable and the reason for the discharge be changed to re-enter military (army). 970606: Commander, Naval Base Seattle directed the applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse (use). PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00847

    Original file (ND02-00847.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00847 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020603, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 Letter from Applicant PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00582

    Original file (ND01-00582.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00582 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010327, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable and the reason for the discharge be changed. Decision A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 011018. Award: Restriction and extra duty for 45 days.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00745

    Original file (ND02-00745.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    My father, S_ F_ SR. was diagnosed with renal failure in 3/91 and soon after put on a kidney transplant donor list. 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 states he commenced his period of unauthorized absence to assist his father. Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)A.