Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-01105
Original file (ND01-01105.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-FR, USN
Docket No. ND01-01105

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 010820, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. The applicant requested a personal appearance hearing before the board in the Washington National Capital Region. The applicant listed the Veterans of Foreign Wars as the representative on the DD Form 293. Subsequent to the application, the applicant converted to a records review.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 020328. 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. We ask that after your careful review of the evidence that you change the discharge as requested by the applicant.

 Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
Statement from applicant dated July 28, 1989
Character/job reference
Character/job reference
Letter to applicant from Naval Military Personnel Command re: change to reenlistment code dated September 21, 1989

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: None
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     850206 - 850807  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 850808                        Date of Discharge: 880706

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 02 10 29
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 17 Parental Consent                Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 52

 Highest Rate: FN

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.30 (4)    Behavior: 3.30 (4)                OTA: 3.30

Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: SSDR, MUC, BER

 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 :

860926:  Applicant on unauthorized absence 0530-0830, 26Sep86.

 861126:  Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (aggravated assault, dereliction of duty), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.


870601:  Applicant on unauthorized absence 0630-0800, 1Jun87.

871203:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence from appointed place of duty, violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Dereliction of duty. Date of offenses: 6 and 16Nov87.
         Award: Forfeiture of $150 per month for 1 month, restriction for 30 days, extra duty for 15 days, reduction to FA. No indication of appeal in the record.

880527:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92 (2 specs): Dereliction of duty, violation of UCMJ, Article 128: Assault with means to cause grievous bodily harm, to wit: a scissors, violation of UCMJ, Article 134: Communicating a threat. Date of offenses: 19, 20, 21, 26Apr88.
         Award: Forfeiture of $335 per month for 2 months, extra duty for 30 days, reduction to FR. No indication of appeal in the record.
880601:  Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (dereliction of duties, assault, communicating a threat, unauthorized absence), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

880603:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.
880603:  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.
880613:  Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.

880629:  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 880706 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’s discharge characterization accurately reflects his service to his country. 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 relief, based on post-service conduct. The applicant did not provide sufficient documentation to warrant an upgrade to his discharge. 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. Relief denied.

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 " 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 | ND01-01080

    Original file (ND01-01080.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Subsequent violations of the UCMJ or conduct resulting in civilian conviction could result in an administrative separation under other than honorable conditions), notified of corrective actions, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning. 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 states: “(Equity Issue) This former...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00415

    Original file (ND03-00415.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of 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 (C and D).The Veterans Administration determines eligibility for post-service benefits not the Navy Discharge Review Board. The NDRB is authorized, however, to consider post-service...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00487

    Original file (ND99-00487.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    No indication of appeal in the record.920708: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.920709: Applicant advised of his rights and having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to appear before an Administrative Discharge Board.920723: Applicant waived his right to an Administrative Discharge Board and representation at the board and to make a...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00580

    Original file (ND02-00580.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    910819: BUPERS directed the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense. 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).Issues 1-3: The Board disagrees with the Applicant’s contention that his discharge was unfair and inequitable. However, the Applicant was discharged for...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00103

    Original file (ND00-00103.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 to permit relief, an error or injustice must be found to have existed during the period of enlistment under review. There was nothing in the records, nor did the applicant provide any documentation, to indicate there existed an error of fact, law,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00107

    Original file (ND02-00107.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The discharge shall change to: UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL)/Misconduct- commission of a serious offense, authority: NAVMILSPERSMAN, Article 3630600.A personal appearance discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on XXXXXX. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 870529 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense (A). However, the Board found that the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01413

    Original file (ND03-01413.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The discharge shall remain: UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/Misconduct – commission of a serious offense, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered: Letter from Applicant PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-01016

    Original file (ND02-01016.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Due to his poor military performance and continued drug and alcohol abuse FR (Applicant) has no potential for future naval service.900427: Drug and Alcohol Screening: Applicant is psychologically drug/alcohol dependent and recommended for separation and VA treatment for dependence. 900522: An Administrative Discharge Board, based upon a preponderance of the evidence and by unanimous vote, found that the Applicant had committed misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct, drug abuse, and...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00597

    Original file (ND99-00597.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Age at Entry: 19 Years Contracted: 4 Education Level: 12 AFQT: 46 Highest Rate: SM2 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks): Performance: 3.10 (2) Behavior: 3.40 (2) OTA: 3.30 Military Decorations: None Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: SSDR, NAVY"E"MEDAL Days of Unauthorized Absence: 10 Character, Narrative Reason, and Authority of Discharge (at time of issuance):UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/Misconduct – commission of a serious offense, authority:...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00505

    Original file (ND01-00505.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    No indication of appeal in the record.Retention Warning from [Fighter Squadron Seventy-Five]: Advised of deficiency (A pattern of misconduct as evidenced by three incidents resulting in Commanding Officer's Non-judicial Punishments for seven separate violations of the UCMJ), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning. 860412: Retention Warning from [Fighter Squadron Seventy-Five]: Advised of...