Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-01114
Original file (ND01-01114.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-FCSR, USN
Docket No. ND01-01114

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 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 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, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues (verbatim)

 1. I think my discharge should be upgraded simply because I am now a more responsible & reliable person. I admit to any wrong doing that I've done in the past, but I do not feel it is right for me to still be receiving the repercussions of these actions done back then. Example: I can not apply my knowledge & skills of what I now have learned in life towards certain job opportunities because of the military discharge I was awarded then. Today, I still regret my mistakes and am sorry for it, but I do not think I should be deprived of certain benefits offered by Veterans Affairs, etc. I served 90% of my enlistment & was given an other than honorable discharge, and because of it I cannot now apply for certain jobs. I think I have suffered long enough for what I've done in the past, and as a citizen of the U.S. I think I have turned out to be a pretty good one. Also, I am not ashamed or regret having served in the U.S. Navy. I made a couple mistakes in that part of my life, but I also did a lot of good for my country. All I ask is to take this application into consideration I would deeply appreciate an upgrade of my discharge. .

 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)     920224 - 921109  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 921110               Date of Discharge: 960315

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 03 04 03
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 18                          Years Contracted: 4 (24 months extension)

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 71

 Highest Rate: FC3

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.30 (2)    Behavior: 3.30 (2)                OTA: 3.70

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM

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 3630600.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

950329:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Dereliction in the performance of duty.
         Award: Forfeiture of $528.00 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days (suspended for 6 months), reduction to E-3 (suspended for 6 months). No indication of appeal in the record.

950421:  Punishment of reduction in rate to FCSN suspended at CO's NJP OF 950329 vacated this date due to continued misconduct.

950421:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 87: Missing Ship's Movement.
         Award: Restriction and extra duty for 45 days (suspended for 6 months), reduction to E-2 (suspended for 6 months). No indication of appeal in the record.

950914:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Absence place of duty, violation of UCMJ, Article 87: Missing Movement.
         Award: Forfeiture of $ 377.00 pay per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to E-1. No indication of appeal in the record.
960221:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense as evidenced by Commanding Officer's nonjudicial punishments of 21 April and 14 September 1995.
960222:          Applicant advised of his rights and having elected to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights.
960229:  Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.

960312:  BUPERS 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 960315 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 states that his discharge should be changed because he is a more responsible and reliable person, and he is sorry for his misconduct. 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 15560C), Change 9, effective
22 Jul 94 until 02 Oct 96, Article 3630600, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL 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 | ND01-00295

    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 | 2002_Navy | ND02-01184

    Original file (ND02-01184.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-01184 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020823, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. Evidence of continuing educational pursuits, a positive employment record, documentation of community service and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities, are examples of verifiable documents that should be provided to receive consideration for relief, based on post-service conduct. PART IV -...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00007

    Original file (ND00-00007.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00007 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 991001, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to Honorable. My name is (applicant). The applicant claims he was young and dumb, made a big mistake (in reference to his misconduct), he’s getting married, is employed and sorry for his misconduct.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00541

    Original file (ND01-00541.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00541 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010319, 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 (C and D).The applicant’s issue states: “The statement of my current employer and friend will show you that I have change from...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-01129

    Original file (ND99-01129.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    980924: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct as evidenced by violation of UCMJ Article 86 (Unauthorized Absence) on 2 April 1998, Article 86 (Unauthorized absence) and Article 87 (Missing Movement) on 18 June 1998, and Article 86 (Unauthorized absence) on 19 September 1998.980924: Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under...

  • 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 | ND02-00334

    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 | 2000_Navy | ND00-00959

    Original file (ND00-00959.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Letter from Applicant Copies of DD Form 214 (2)Copies of Medical Documents (7pgs) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: USN None Inactive: USNR (DEP) None Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 910731 Date of Discharge: 940128 Length of Service (years, months, days): Active: 01 10...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00495

    Original file (ND99-00495.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The discharge shall remain: UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/ PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-140 (formerly 3630600).The NDRB did note an administrative error on the original DD Form 214. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 Copy of charge sheet dated 4 March 1998 Statement from applicant Letter from Department of Treasury to the applicant...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00166

    Original file (ND01-00166.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00166 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 001127, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. Relief is denied.The applicant’s second issue states: “The truth is I had requested 4 times with a request chit to be discharged from the service prior to my Captains Masts. My request is to have an honorable discharge, Thank you.” The Board carefully reviewed the applicant’s service record and found no impropriety or...