Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00020
Original file (ND01-00020.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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


ex-ENFN, USN
Docket No. ND01-00020

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 001004, 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 010329. After a thorough review of the records, 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. My discharge was inequitable due to the fact it was based on one isolated incident in 30 months of service with no adverse action.

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: None
          Inactive: USNR (DEP)     970325 - 970709  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 970710               Date of Discharge: 991004

 Length of Service (years, months, days):
         Active: 02 02 25
          Inactive: None
Age at Entry: 18                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 68
Highest Rate: ETFN

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):
Performance: 4.00 (2)    Behavior: 3.00 (2)                OTA: 3.47

 Military Decorations: None
Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: AFEM, SSR, MUC, NUC

 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 :

981123:  Counseling: Advised of deficiency (Private indebtedness), notified of corrective actions and assistance available.
990316:  Counseling: Advised of deficiency (Performance.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available.
990528:  U.S. Naval Criminal Investigative Service. Complete report found in service record.
990528:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 123 (6 specs): Forgery of six checks for the total of $3475.00.
         Award: Restriction for 60 days, reduction to ENFN. No indication of appeal in the record.
990622:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.
990824:          Applicant advised of his rights and having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to appear before an Administrative Discharge Board.
990824:  An Administrative Discharge Board, based upon a preponderance of the evidence and by unanimous vote, found that the applicant had committed a serious offense, that the misconduct warranted separation, and recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions.
990902:  Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.

990921:  Commander, Naval Surface Force, U.S. Atlantic Fleet 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 991004 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, 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 applicant implies that a permissive doctrine exists whereby one in the military is allowed an "isolated incident". The Board believes that the applicant is confusing this with the civilian world wherein some offenses are treated with leniency because they are a first time incident on an otherwise clear record. No such leniency exists in the military. The applicant is responsible for his actions and must accept the consequences of his misdeeds. The Board will not grant relief on the basis of this issue.
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 in the civilian life subsequent to leaving the Service. However, the Board is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge (E). 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 community service (letter from the activity/community group) and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities (police records check) in order for consideration for clemency based on post-service conduct. At this time, the applicant has not provided any documentation of good character and conduct. Therefore no relief will be granted. The applicant 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.

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 123, for forgery, 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 | ND01-00603

    Original file (ND01-00603.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION There was nothing in the applicant’s records, nor did the applicant provide any documentation, to indicate there existed an error of fact, law, procedure, or discretion at the time of discharge. Relief denied.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 in the civilian life subsequent to leaving the Service.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00824

    Original file (ND03-00824.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. 010716: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.010716: 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00313

    Original file (ND00-00313.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 III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 990112 general under honorable conditions for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (A and B). PART IV - INFORMATION FOR THE APPLICANT If you believe that the decision in your case is unclear, not responsive to the issues...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00191

    Original file (ND03-00191.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    No indication of appeal in the record [Extracted from CO’s letter dated 010103].001219: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.001219: 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-01132

    Original file (ND99-01132.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. Character, Narrative Reason, and Authority of Discharge (at time of issuance):GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-142 (formerly 3630605). PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 980901 general (under honorable conditions)...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00446

    Original file (ND03-00446.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review. 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) 981117 - 990929 COG Active: None Period of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-01117

    Original file (ND02-01117.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB found credible evidence of misconduct in the service records of the Applicant. Verifiable proof of post-service accomplishments must be provided in order for the Applicant to claim post-service conduct and behavior as a reason to upgrade a less than honorable discharge. At this time, the Applicant has not provided such documentation for the Board to consider an upgrade.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00168

    Original file (ND01-00168.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Relief will not be granted concerning this issue.In response to applicant’s issue 3 and 4, while the applicant’s enlisted performance averages were fair, they, and the applicant’s “acts of merit”, do not exculpate him from his violations of UCMJ Articles 121 (larceny) and Article 123 (forgery). This is not an issue for which the Board will grant relief.In response to applicant’s issue 7, the Board does not accept alcohol abuse as a factor sufficient to exculpate the applicant from the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00547

    Original file (ND02-00547.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00547 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020318, 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:Copy of DD Form 214. The Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities as requested in the issue.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00211

    Original file (ND04-00211.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. ]990528: Commanding Officer recommended discharge general (under honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense. The Applicant contends that his ability to serve in the Navy can be attributed to his “youth,” “marital and family and child care programs,” and “personal problems.” While he may feel that his personal problems and immaturity...