Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00544
Original file (ND02-00544.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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


ex-SR, USN
Docket No. ND02-00544

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 020318, 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 designate a representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 030311. 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 3630605.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION


Issues, as submitted

1. I am requesting an upgrade to an Honorable discharge. The offense was a one-time occurrence and I now have realized the error of the offense and have been a model citizen since discharge. I am also requesting a written reply to this request.
Documentation
In addition to a partial service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Copy of DD Form 214
Character Reference letter from Rev W.L. P_, dtd Feb 13, 2002
 Police Check dtd Feb 22, 2002
 Character Reference letter from Supervisor, H_ B_, dtd Feb 01, 2002

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     951122 - 960709  COG
          Active: None
Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 960710               Date of Discharge: 970919

 Length of Service (years, months, days):
         Active: 01 02 10 (Doesn't exclude lost time.)
          Inactive: None
Age at Entry: 20                          Years Contracted: 4*
Education Level: 12*              AFQT: Unknown*

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

 Performance: 3.0 (1)     Behavior: 3.0 (1)                 OTA: 3.0
Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: None
Days of Unauthorized Absence: 11

 *Cannot verify due to information not contained in service record.
Character, Narrative Reason, and Authority of Discharge (at time of issuance):

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630605.
Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

[PARTIAL SERVICE RECORD RECEIVED BY THE BOARD. ADMINISTRATIVE DISCHARGE PACKAGE NOT CONTAINED IN SERVICE RECORD AND APPLICANT DID NOT PROVIDE SERVICE RECORD INFORMATION.]
970814:  Unauthorized absence from USS CONOLLY (DD 979).

 970825:  Returned on board this date (11 days).
970827:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence; violation of UCMJ, Article 112a: Wrongful use of a controlled substance.
         Award: Forfeiture of $450 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to E-1. No indication of appeal in the record.
970919:  Applicant discharged Under Other Than Honorable Conditions by reason of misconduct - commission of a serious offense.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 970919 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. There is credible evidence in the record that the Applicant used illegal drugs. Just one occurrence of drug abuse warranted processing for separation, normally under other than honorable conditions. Relief 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 inequity must have existed during the period of enlistment in question. No such error or inequity 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, employment record, documentation of community service, certification of non-involvement with civil authorities and credible evidence of a substance free lifestyle, are examples of verifiable documentation that may be provided to receive consideration for relief, based on post-service conduct. The Applicant’s evidence of post-service conduct was found not to mitigate the offense for which he was discharged. 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 14, effective
03 Oct 96 until 971212, Article 3630605, 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 | 2003_Navy | ND03-00087

    Original file (ND03-00087.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In the acknowledgement letter, the Applicant was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a record review prior to any personal appearance hearing. Though Navy regulations only permit conditional waivers for General discharges not Honorable discharges, BM2 M_'s (Applicant) designated military lawyer did not know this and provided erroneous advice to BM2 M_ (Applicant). Navy regulations required that for misconduct to be a serious offense it must be an offense...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00752

    Original file (ND00-00752.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-SN, USN Docket No. 971124: Applicant advised of his rights and having elected to consult 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.971231: Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00647

    Original file (ND00-00647.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00647 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000425, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to entry level separation or uncharacterized. In response to the applicant’s issue 2, the Board At this time, the applicant has not provided any documentation of good character and conduct.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00116

    Original file (ND02-00116.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The discharge shall remain: GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630605.The NDRB did note an administrative error on the original 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: 940812 Date of Discharge: 970911 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 02 11 21 Inactive: 00 01 10 After a thorough...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00521

    Original file (ND01-00521.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00521 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010314, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. 980608: Letter of Deficiency issued by Applicant's counsel.980610: Commanding officer directed the applicant's discharge with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense. The applicant did not provide any documentation of her post-service.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01335

    Original file (ND03-01335.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 review. The discharge shall remain: GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910 - 142 (formerly 3630605).The NDRB did note administrative error(s) on the original DD Form 214.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-01193

    Original file (ND01-01193.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Decision A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 020419. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Applicant's letter to the Board dtd 20 Mar 2001 Copy of DD Form 214 (2 copies) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: USNR (DEP) 961113 - 971014 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment:...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00067

    Original file (ND03-00067.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-00067 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 20021009, 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 Character Reference ltr from S_ S_, Chief of Police, dtd Aug 28, 2002 Letter from Employer, J_ S_, Service Manager, Railserve Inc.,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00456

    Original file (ND02-00456.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00456 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020225, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. On May 4 th I was informed that I was not going to be transferred and that all request where denied.My dad's condition was serious so I took the matter upon myself to leave my duty station on May 6 th 2000 and return home to provide care for my father. I received a General Discharge (under honorable conditions) and...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00628

    Original file (ND99-00628.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND99-00628 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 990406, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable 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 requested her discharge be upgraded to general but provided no propriety, equity or post...