Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00291
Original file (ND02-00291.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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


ex-RPSN, USN
Docket No. ND02-00291

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 020123, 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 021008. 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, as submitted

1. First of all; I would like to apologize to the board for submitting a request after five (5) years being out of the Armed Service. I just found out that I could submit a request to have my discharge upgraded upon approval of the board. My discharge was inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident in 120 months of service with no other adverse action. I have been faithful with my duties as being an outstanding Sailor (see enclosed performance record) for over nine (9) years. I have a letter submitted by a Chaplain that stated I had nothing to do with the charges but priest confidentiality did not allow her to shed some important light on this situation (by her counseling of two other parties), which would have cleared me. During my Captain's Mast, the Captain would not let the Chaplain's speak on my behalf. I chose Captain's Mast knowing that charges would be dropped and I could continue my military career. My life was to serve my country faithful and retire as a Sailor. Today, I still encourage young people to join the Armed Services for our country and have succeeded over 75+ new enlisted. I am begging the board to reconsider upgrading my discharge so it would not hinder my career any longer than it already has. Being discharged Under Other Than Honorable conditions from the military has been with me all the days of my life after being released. Today, I still want to be a part of the government serving my country. Due to the discharge I received, it is hindering my advancement in the corporate world. I plead the board to call my job references if necessary for my achievements throughout my career after the military. Please view all documents closely when making your final decision. I am a true warrior and still wear the name as a Navy Sailor. God Bless and thank you for your devoted time.
Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
Copy of Enlisted Performance Record
Copies of Enlisted Performance Evaluation Reports (6 pages)
 Letter of Support from R_ A. K_, LCDR, CHC, USN
 Letter of Support from P_ S. F_, LT, CHC, USNR
Résumé (3 pages)
 Copy of DD Form 214
Letter of Support from J_ G. P_, Jr, CDR, USN
Direction printout
Reference Letter from J_ R. M_, Retired Chaplain

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     870224 - 870304  COG
          Active: USN                        870305 - 901128  HON
Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 901129               Date of Discharge: 960426
Length of Service (years, months, days):

          Active: 05 04 27
          Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 24                          Years Contracted: 3 (30 months extension)
Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 24

 Highest Rate: RP2
Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 4.00 (7)    Behavior: 4.00 (7)                OTA: 4.00
Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NFMFR, NDSM, HSM, NMCOR(2 ND ), M-16 Rifle (Expert), AFEM, NASR, NAM(2 ND ), GCM(2 ND )
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 :

901129:  Reenlisted at NAVSTA CHASN, SC for 3 years (30 months extension).
951211:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92: On or about 941221, was derelict in the performance of his duties in that he failed to properly account for monies by failing to accurately annotate the correct amount paid for the purchase of poinsettias; Specification 2: On or about 950414, was derelict in the performance of his duties in that he failed to properly account for monies by failing to accurately annotate the correct amount paid for the purchase of Easter lilies, violation of UCMJ, Article 107: Specification 1: On or about 941221, with intent to deceive, sign an official record, to wit: White Rose Flower Shop receipt #37165-2; Specification 2: On or about 950414, with intent to deceive, sign an official record, to wit: White Rose Flower Shop receipt #37165-24 which was a false record, and known to be false; Specification 3: On or about 941221, with intent to deceive, sign an official record, to wit: Religious Offering Fund Disbursement Request accounting for $839.20; Specification 4: On or about 950414, with intent to deceive, sign an official record, to wit: Religious Offering Fund Disbursement Request accounting for $839.20; Specification 5: On or about 950815, with intent to deceive, make to an ENS a false official statement to wit: "At no time did I ask RPSA C_ to produce a receipt for flowers bought at White Rose Flower Shop in either DEC94 or APR95." Violation of the UCMJ, Article 121: Specification 1: On or about 941221, steal U.S. Currency, military property a value of $239.80; Specification 2: On or about 950414, steal U.S. Currency, military property a value of $71.92. Violation of the UCMJ, Article 134: Specification 1: On or about DEC94-JAN95, wrongfully solicit RPSA C_ to make and sign a false official document, to wit: a receipt #37165-2 in the amount of $839.00 for command evaluation inspection; Specification 2: On or about APR95-MAY95, wrongfully solicit RPSA C_ to make and sign a false official document, to wit: a receipt #37165-24 in the amount of $719.20 for the command evaluation inspection; Specification 3: On or about 950727, wrongfully solicit RPSA C_ to make a false official statement to an investigating officer, to wit: "If you are asked about the White Rose receipts (37165-2 and 37165-24) deny anything," or words to that effect.
         Award: Forfeiture of $747.90 pay per month for 2 months, extra duty for 45 days, reduction to E-4. Appealed 951218. Appeal denied 960109.
960103:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.
960108:  Applicant advised of his rights and having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to appear before an Administrative Discharge Board.
960223:         An Administrative Discharge Board, based upon a preponderance of the evidence and by unanimous vote, found that the applicant had committed a serious offense, by a vote of 2 to 1 the board recommended separation, but to suspend the separation for 12 months, and by a unanimous vote recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions.

960319:  Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.

960411:  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 960426 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. Despite the applicant’s years of honorable service, awards and high performance and behavior average markings, the Board found that the applicant was properly and equitably discharged for misconduct. The applicant did not provide sufficient documentation to prove his innocence of the charges which led to his administrative separation, or to mitigate his misconduct sufficient to warrant an upgrade to his discharge. A characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions is warranted when the member's conduct constitutes a significant departure from that expected of a sailor. T he applicant’s service was marred by award of nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on one occasion for the commission of a serious offense. The applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, reflects his willful disobedience of the orders and directives which regulate good order and discipline in the naval service, and falls short of that required for an honorable characterization of service. Relief denied.

 The NDRB has no authority to change reenlistment codes or make recommendations to permit reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Naval Service or any other branch of the Armed Forces. Neither a less than fully honorable discharge nor an unfavorable “RE” code is, in itself, a bar to reenlistment. A request for waiver is normally done only during the processing of a formal application for enlistment through a recruiter. Relief is therefore denied.

The applicant’s discharge characterization accurately reflects his service to his country. The discharge was proper and equitable. 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. Relief not warranted.

The applicant 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. Representation at a personal appearance hearing is 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 " 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 | ND99-00684

    Original file (ND99-00684.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND99-00684 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 990427, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. Specification 2: did, at or near Kingsville, TX, on or about 11 Jan 93 wrongfully appropriate dependent travel benefits payments, of a value of $909.70, the property of the U.S. Government. 961004: BUPERS recommended to the Secretary of the Navy that applicant be discharge under other than honorable conditions by...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00862

    Original file (MD04-00862.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable or general (under honorable conditions). After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the Applicant’s service was discovered by the NDRB. You should read Enclosure (5) of the Directive before submitting such a complaint.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00715

    Original file (ND02-00715.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    950222: 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 [Extracted from case file]. Based upon a preponderance of the evidence the Board found, by a vote of 3-0, the Applicant committed misconduct and his service should be characterized as other than honorable. However, the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00828

    Original file (ND01-00828.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00828 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010605, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 980129 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (A). PART IV - INFORMATION FOR THE APPLICANT If you believe that the decision in your case is unclear, not...

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0500926

    Original file (MD0500926.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 (C and D).The Applicant contends that his discharge was improper as his administrative separation was not part of the sentence adjudged at his special court-martial. As of this time, the Applicant has not provided any post-service documentation for the Board to consider relief on this basis.The Applicant remains eligible for...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00755

    Original file (ND00-00755.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Letter from Applicant Employment Reference Letter (4) Copies of DD Form 214 (2) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: USMCR (IADT) 910924 - 920328 HON Inactive: USMCR (J) 910607 - 910923 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 930511 Date of Discharge: 950505 Length of Service (years,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00309

    Original file (ND03-00309.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-00309 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20021211. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. As the representative, we ask that consideration be given to equitable relief, as this is a matter that involves a determination whether a discharge should be changed under the equity standards, to include any issue upon which the Applicant submits to the Board’s discretionary...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501545

    Original file (ND0501545.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Character Reference ltr from T_ T. C_ (Applicant), undated, not signedNational Personnel Records Check for Applicant, dtd November 4, 2005 Ltr form National Personnel Records Center, dtd February 13, 2006 Applicant’s DD Form 214 (Service 2) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: None Active:...

  • AF | DRB | CY2005 | FD2005-00024

    Original file (FD2005-00024.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In addition, he received three Letters of Reprimand, two Letters of Counseling, and two Records of Individual Counseling for various acts of misconduct to include being late for duty, failure to go, failure to pay just debts, writing bad checks, and for wrongfully using his government credit card. Attachment: Examiner's Brief DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD ANDREWS AFB, MD (Former AlC) (HGH SRA) 1. For this you received a Record of Individual Counseling dated...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501306

    Original file (ND0501306.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). I recommend that he be separated from the United States Navy with an Other Than Honorable discharge.”011115: COMSUBGRU TWO directed the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct commission of a serious offense. The Applicant states, “after 3 years of good service I made a mistake.” Despite a...