Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-01034
Original file (ND00-01034.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-ADAN, USNR
Docket No. ND00-01034

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 000906, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. 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 010301. 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: GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910 - 142 (formerly 3630605).

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

1. I would really be grateful for the application be granted. I really could use it in my future goals, such as law enforcement. I am currently working two jobs and attending college full time for a masters in criminology and a minor in psychology. Attached are letters from my bosses.

 Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
Character/job reference dated June 19, 2000
Character reference dated June 19, 2000
Copy of fax letter to congressman from applicant dated June 19, 2000

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

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

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 960913               Date of Discharge: 991215

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 02 06 04
         Inactive: 00 00 29

 Age at Entry: 18                          Years Contracted: 8

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 53

 Highest Rate: AO3

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 2.75 (4)    Behavior: 2.75 (4)                OTA: 2.72

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: None

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

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

GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-142 (formerly 3630605).

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

970612:  Commenced 36 months of active duty under the Seaman Apprenticeship Program.
980206:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 117: Provoking speeches or gestures.
         Award: Oral reprimand. No indication of appeal in the record.
991006:  Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (Disrespectful language/conduct towards a senior petty officer.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.
        
991206:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Failure to obey a lawful order.
         Award: Restriction for 20 days, reduction to AOAN. No indication of appeal in the record.
991206:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge general (under honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense and misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.
991206:          Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights.
991228:  Commanding officer recommended discharge general (under 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 000906 general (under 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 would really be grateful for the application be granted. I really could use it in my future goals, such as law enforcement. I am currently working two jobs and attending college full time for a masters in criminology and a minor in psychology. Attached are letters from my bosses.” 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 NDRB did not find the applicant’s documentation of his post service significant enough to warrant an upgrade. Relief is denied.

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. 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 | 1999_Navy | ND99-00392

    Original file (ND99-00392.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board’s vote was 3 to 2 that the character of the discharge shall change to: GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/MISCONDUCT- Commission of a Serious Offense, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910 - 142 (formerly 3630605). Those factors include, but are not limited to, the following: evidence of continuing educational pursuits (transcripts, diplomas, degrees, vocational-technical certificates), a verifiable employment record (Letter of Recommendation from boss), documentation of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00412

    Original file (ND99-00412.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MMFN (applicant) has no potential for further service. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 980423 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (A). Although the Board respects and appreciates the applicant’s over four years of service, the seriousness of the above offense is such that the Board found the characterization of the applicant’s discharge as Other Than Honorable...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00106

    Original file (ND03-00106.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-00106 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 20021024, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. [Note BUPERSINST 1900.8 list the authority as 3630600 instead of 3630605] Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :000725: Special Court Martial: Charge I: violation of the UCMJ, Article 86: Specification 1: Unauthorized absence from 000321 to 000323 (2 days). You may view DoD Directive 1332.28 and other...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00456

    Original file (ND02-00456.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00456 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020225, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. On May 4 th I was informed that I was not going to be transferred and that all request where denied.My dad's condition was serious so I took the matter upon myself to leave my duty station on May 6 th 2000 and return home to provide care for my father. I received a General Discharge (under honorable conditions) and...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00396

    Original file (ND01-00396.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00396 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010212, 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:Copy of DD Form 214 Character reference dated June 23, 2000 Character reference dated April 29, 1999 Letter from Montclair State University dated December 10, 1999 Forty-three pages from...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00905

    Original file (ND00-00905.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00905 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000717, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The United States Navy has been good to me and again, I am very proud to have served for such a great organization. At this time, the applicant has not provided any documentation of good character and conduct.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00625

    Original file (ND04-00625.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. “Board of Review: Upon review of my application, my service records will indicate that an upgrade of my discharge is not deserving. Bill (That I paid $1200) to better myself with education.” Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:None PART II - SUMMARY OF...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00721

    Original file (ND01-00721.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Decision A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 011127. Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events : 990512: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 000914 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (A).

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-01005

    Original file (ND01-01005.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-01005 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010730, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:None. Normally, to permit relief, an error or injustice must have existed during the period of enlistment in question.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00085

    Original file (ND03-00085.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In the acknowledgement letter to the applicant, she was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing. During the process of my discharge from the Navy, I was told that my discharge was going to be Convenience of the Government due to Pregnancy/or Childbirth. A review of the Applicant’s service record shows she did not meet the requirements to be discharged for misconduct due to commission of a serious...