Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00327
Original file (ND01-00327.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-SR, USNR
Docket No. ND01-00327

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 010124, 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 010629. 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.
PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

1. I would like to, "THANK", the board for its time in reviewing my discharge. I greatly appreciate this. Members of the Board, my discharge was not fair because I was not aware of my options. I didn't know, nor did I understand. Members of the Board, I had gotten myself into some trouble or a mess during my time in the service. The outcome of this mess, resulted in reduction in rank and several days of extra duty. During my punishment I went to talk to a guy about my future in the Navy. I didn't want out of the Navy; I just wanted to do my punishment and start over on a different ship. This guy I went to see explained to me that I was going to be discharge from theNavy. My discharge was inequitable because it was based on a couple of incidents or that led to my discharge. Members of the Board I would like a General Discharge, please consider me for a General Discharge, please consider me for a General Discharge. "Issues" again, when I was being discharge I didn't understand, nor did I realize my options as far as staying in the Navy. I was just told that I was being discharge. Again, please consider me for a General Discharge.

2. I feel my discharge should be changed because I've always honored and respected the Navy as well as all Military personnel. When I signed up for the Navy and met the requirements, it had been a dream come true. Getting in the Navy had been a very proud and happy moment for me. While in the Navy, I was fortunate to go out to sea several times, even did a Med cruise, an unforgettable moment that I will tresure for the rest of my life. Also while in the Navy, I got myself in some trouble. I had a violation on me (UCMJ Art 121) about a credit card. I told M.A.A. that FC3 W_ gave me his credit card to use. I had given FC3 W_ a ride home to Cincinnati I was headed to Columbus. FC3 W_ allowed to use his credit card. Anyway, I never got to explain this, not to the M.A.A., or to the C.O. I feel this led to my discharge. Again my discharge was inequitable because of a violation that was false. Members of the Board, please change my discharge to a General discharge.


 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: None

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 851231                        Date of Discharge: 880512

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 01 09 21
         Inactive: 00 06 20

 Age at Entry: 17 Parental Consent                Years Contracted: 8

 Education Level: 12                                 AFQT: 26

 Highest Rate: SN

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.10 (2)    Behavior: 3.20 (2)                OTA: 3.20

Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: SSDR

Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

 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 :

860722:  Applicant ordered to active duty for 36 months under the Active Mariner Program.

880327:  Counseling: Advised of deficiency (Private indebtedness and responsibilities.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available.
880411:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Disobeying a lawful order to report to MAA office at 1745, 5Apr88, violation of UCMJ, Article 121: Wrongful appropriation of a credit card of about $115.00, the property of FC3 on 26Feb88.
         Award: Forfeiture of $376 per month for 2 month, restriction and extra duty for 30 days, reduction to SA. No indication of appeal in the record.
880413:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence on 8Apr88, violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Disobeying a lawful order not to wear coveralls out Metro pass gate.
         Award: Restriction and extra duty for 30 days, reduction to SR. No indication of appeal in the record.
880418:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under Other Than Honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the Commission of a serious offense.
880428:          Applicant advised of his rights and having 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.
880501:  Commanding officer recommended discharge under Other Than Honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the Commission of a serious offense.

880507:  CNMPC 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 880512 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).

Issue 1. The applicant states his discharge was not fair because he was not aware of his options and his discharge was based on a couple of incidents. The applicant signed the acknowledgement of rights form, stating he was aware of his rights including the right to counsel. The Board determined the discharge was proper and equitable. Relief denied.

Issue 2. The applicant states his discharge should be changed because he always honored and respected the Navy as well as all military personnel. The Board determined this issue has no merit. The discharge was proper and equitable. Relief denied.

 The following is provided for the benefit of the applicant. Normally, to permit relief, an error or injustice must have existed during the period of enlistment in question. No such error or injustice occurred during the applicant’s enlistment. Additionally, 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 civilian life, subsequent to leaving the service. However, the NDRB is authorized to consider outstanding post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge, 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. Verifiable proof of any 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. Evidence of continuing educational pursuits, an employment record, documentation of community service, certification of non-involvement with civil authorities and proof of his not using drugs, are examples of verifiable documents that should have been provided to receive consideration for clemency, based on post-service conduct. The applicant did not provide any of these documents. He is reminded that he remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of his discharge. The applicant can provide additional documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments at that time. Legal representation at a personal appearance hearing is highly recommended but not required.

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. Under the Manual for Courts-Martial, a punitive discharge is authorized for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Article 92 (disobeying a lawful order), and Article 121 (wrongful appropriation of value of more than $100.00), 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 " afls10.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 | ND01-00744

    Original file (ND01-00744.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00744 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010508, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to Honorable. Petty officer W_ comes to the ship and good things go bad again. But when the change of our petty officers and chiefs happened he got a position of power.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00918

    Original file (ND02-00918.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00918 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020612, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. 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. 921124: An Administrative Discharge Board, based upon a preponderance of the evidence and by unanimous vote, found...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00078

    Original file (ND00-00078.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00078 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 991019, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. 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 determined that relevant and material facts stated in a court-martial...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01169

    Original file (ND03-01169.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-01169 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030626. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Verifiable proof of any 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.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501563

    Original file (ND0501563.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events : 950420: Reenlisted this date for a term of 4 years.950720: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 111: Drunken or reckless driving, MS3 W_, did onboard NAS Jacksonville, on 950703, disregard a stop sign and proceed at a high rate of speed while drunk.Violation of UCMJ, Article 121: Larceny, MS3 W_ onboard NAS...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00295

    Original file (ND01-00295.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I was 17 years old at the time and that told me that he wanted me out of the picture. (c) Commanding Officer's Nonjudicial punishment of 2 May 1992, for violation of UCMJ Article 121 (larceny).940111: Applicant advised of her rights and having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to appear before an Administrative Discharge Board.920203: An Administrative Discharge Board, based upon a preponderance of the evidence and by unanimous vote, found that the applicant...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00815

    Original file (ND00-00815.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00815 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000613, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. 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 ( a statement) provided no decisional issues for the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00242

    Original file (ND04-00242.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). Decision A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20040728. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00326

    Original file (ND00-00326.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The state of MS will not certify me as a law enforcement officer unless my discharge can be changed to at least "general". 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).In the applicant’s issue 1, the Board determined this issue is without merit. The applicant did not provide sufficient documentation to demonstrate good character and conduct.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00443

    Original file (ND01-00443.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00443 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010222, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. When people see what I have done with my life and who I have become as a person, they will think that the Navy had something to do with it, but now I'm ashamed to say I was in the Navy because I don't have an Honorable Discharge". CA 871005: Only so much of the sentence as provided for confinement at hard labor for 3...