Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00615
Original file (ND02-00615.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-MSSR, USN
Docket No. ND02-00615

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 020403, 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 030116. 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 HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL)/Misconduct – commission of a serious offense, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as submitted

1. Request the board review my Discharge and upgrade it to Honorable due to the fact that I am seeking employment with the local Sheriff's office and this would be an opportunity to make a major change in my life and serve my community and country. I also want the board to realize that as I've gotten older, I realize that my past decisions haven't always been the best ones, but I'm definitely trying to change my life and this would be a tremendous help to me.

 Documentation

In addition to the service record, no discharge package available, 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):
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     880519 - 880621  COG
         Active: USN                        None

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 880622               Date of Discharge: 920809

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 04 01 18
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 18                          Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 35

 Highest Rate: MS3

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.40 (6)    Behavior: 3.46 (6)                OTA : 3.50

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NUC, SSDR, NDSM, SASMw2b*, KLM

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: 31

 Character, Narrative Reason, and Authority of Discharge (at time of issuance):

UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL)/Misconduct – commission of a serious offense, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

890609:  Unauthorized absence from 890609 to 890612 (3days/S).

910110:  Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (As evidenced by your misconduct in which you were awarded CO's NJP on 910110 for a Violation of the UCMJ, Article 89, Disrespect toward superior commissioned officer, Violation of the UCMJ, Article 90, Failure to obey a lawful command from superior commissioned officer), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

910110:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 89: Disrespect toward superior commissioned officer, violation of UCMJ Article 90: Disobey a lawful command from superior commissioned officer.
         Award: Forfeiture of $100.00 pay per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 20 days, reduction in rate (suspended for 6 months) No indication of appeal in the record.
920523:  Summary Court-Martial.
         Charge I: violation of the UCMJ, Article 86: (1) Unauthorized absence from 920122 to 920124 (2days/S); (2) Unauthorized absence from 920127 to 920218 (23days/S); (3) Unauthorized absence from 920501 to 920504 (3days/S). Charge II: violation of the UCMJ, Article 92: Failure to obey a lawful regulation; failed to report an offense under the UCMJ on 910830.
         Finding: to Charge I and specification 1, 2, and 3 thereunder, guilty. To charge II and specification thereunder, guilty.
         Sentence: Confinement for 30 days, forfeiture of $518.00 pay per month for 1 month, reduced to E-1.
         CA action 920528: Approved findings and sentence.
         
920616:  Released from confinement and returned to full duty.

Note: Complete discharge not available.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 920809 under honorable conditions (general) 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 Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment opportunities as requested by the Applicant. The Board’s charter limits its review to a determination on the propriety and equity of the discharge. In the Applicant’s case the Board could discern no impropriety or inequity and therefore considered the Applicant’s discharge was proper and equitable. Relief denied.

T here 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, a positive employment record, documentation of community service and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities are examples of verifiable documents that should have been provided to receive consideration for relief, based on post-service conduct. After a complete review of the record, including the evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board determined that the Applicant’s discharge was proper and equitable and that his evidence of post service accomplishments was found not to mitigate the misconduct for which he was discharged. Relief denied.

The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of discharge. The Applicant can provide additional documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments at that time. 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), effective 15 Aug 91 until
04 Mar 93, 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 | 2000_Navy | ND00-01022

    Original file (ND00-01022.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) also advised that the board first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing. 901015: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: UA from USS KITTY HAWK, from 0700-0830, 901007, violation of UCMJ Article 92: Derelict in the performance of duty on or about 901007 by failing to clean work center space in a timely manner. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00185

    Original file (ND02-00185.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00185 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 011227, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The Applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. After my discharge we were divorced.2.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00859

    Original file (ND01-00859.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-MSSR, USN Docket No. ND01-00859 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010615, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00589

    Original file (ND04-00589.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. 901219: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: UA from 0630, 901015 until 1530, 901030 (15days/S), violation of UCMJ, Article 86: UA from 1905, 901030 until 0530, 901217(47days/S), violation of UCMJ, Article 134: Restriction breaking. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00457

    Original file (ND00-00457.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00457 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000223, 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 931026 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (A and B). At this time the applicant has not provided sufficient documentation of good character and conduct.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00407

    Original file (ND00-00407.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    When asked why I told them the reasons listed above. CA action 910423: Sentence approved and ordered executed except for that portion of the punishment adjudging confinement in excess of 11 days is suspended for 6 months.910423: USS FORRESTAL (CV 59) notified applicant of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to commission of serious offense and misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct as evidenced by all punishments under...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00035

    Original file (ND04-00035.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. No indication of appeal in the record.881130: Vacate suspended reduction to SA awarded at CO’s NJP dated 881123 due to continued misconduct.890210: Retention Warning from USS HALSEY (CG-23): Advised of deficiency (During your first two weeks onboard USS HALSEY you failed to go to your appointed place of duty at the prescribed time on five (5) separate...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-01201

    Original file (ND02-01201.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-01201 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020820, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. discharge. Naval Council of Personnel Boards Attn: Naval Discharge Review Board 720 Kennon Street SE Rm 309 Washington Navy Yard DC 20374-5023

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01034

    Original file (ND03-01034.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Charge II: violation of the UCMJ, Article 89 (2 specs): Specification 1: Disrespect toward a superior commissioned officer on 930119. It must be noted that most Sailors serve honorably and well and therefore earn honorable discharges.

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-01133

    Original file (ND99-01133.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND99-01133 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 990824, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. In the acknowledgement letter to the applicant, the applicant was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION