Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00798
Original file (ND02-00798.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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


ex-SR, USN
Docket No. ND02-00798

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 020515, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable and the reason for the discharge be changed to (left blank). 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 030214. 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 and narrative reason 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. This letter is in reference to my application for upgrading my Military Discharge Records, I would also like to thank the Board for taking the time to review my request. As my records show I enlisted in the US Navy in October of 1991, for a total of 6 years. During my enlistment I failed to meet Physical standards for the Special Warfare Program. I was given the opportunity to still retain my "A" school, after only 2 weeks I requested to drop from my school. I was then told to report to the USS SUNBIRD (ASR 15) on 01 April 1992. During my duty on the USS SUNBIRD, I committed a serious offense (unauthorized absence, making a false statement). I will not make up any stories of why I committed these offenses, and take full responsibility and can say that only later did I understand the gravity of having this on my records. After getting out of the Navy I returned to school and now work in the Law Enforcement profession. I have worked as a police officer for about 4 years and now work as a Federal Officer for DPS/Pentagon Police at the Pentagon. I have held this position for over a year now. I was working for the Department on the events of 11 Sept 2001 and have a felt very proud to be able to serve the DOD community. The reason for my request is that I am going to be applying for either a position with Protective services or with the ERT team, both require I can be granted a security clearance. I feel that having these (2) items on my Military records could hinder my chances for these positions. I am not trying to get out of what I have done in the past, it was entirely my fault and no one made me do what I did. I feel in the past 10 years I have grown and matured and would like to be able to serve the DOD and in a way the Navy by stay with, and being able to excel with DPS. I also have been trusted to work in many areas within the past few months (Security details for the Secretary of the Navy, Senator J_ M_, and I assisted with the Memorial service after the 11 th ). I think I have shown that I can follow through with something I start now and not just want to quit, or give up. Below I have listed some of my coworkers and some references that may be able to give examples of my character now. I am hoping the Board will review and see that I did make a mistake over 10 years ago, and that I have I never had other incident with any local or federal agency. At this time I would like to have my discharge upgraded from General to Honorable, and if possible the narrative reason changed. I understand that my discharge was filed under misconduct, and I was told what could happen. At the same time I did request the discharge, if I had not it was my understanding that I would have been able to still serve and finish my enlistment, even after my incident. Thank you for taking the time to read my request. Respectfully,








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):
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     910726 - 911030  COG
          Active: None
Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 911031               Date of Discharge: 920814
Length of Service (years, months, days):

          Active: 00 09 14
          Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 21                          Years Contracted: 4
Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 53

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

 Performance: 3.00 (1)    Behavior: 3.00 (1)                OTA : 3.60
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 HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL)/Misconduct – commission of a serious offense, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

920507:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Absence from unit, organization, or place of duty, violation of UCMJ, Article 107: False official statements.
         Award: Confinement on bread and water for 3 days. 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 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.
920714:  Commanding Officer recommended discharge as type warranted by service record by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.
920807:  BUPERS directed the Applicant's discharge under honorable conditions (general) 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 920814 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. A characterization of service of under honorable conditions (general) is warranted when significant negative aspects of a member's conduct or performance of duty outweigh the positive aspects of the member's military record. T he Applicant’s service was marred by award of nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on one occasion. The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, reflects his 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. No other narrative reason other than misconduct more clearly describes the circumstances surrounding the Applicant’s processing for administrative separation. 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 is evident 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, to enhance employment opportunities or for 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), 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 | 2002_Navy | ND02-00427

    Original file (ND02-00427.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    To the board of review my name is A_ A_ (Applicant) and am I asking that my OTH discharge be upgraded to Honorable discharge. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Copy of Certificate of Ordination dated June 12, 1998 Copy of Pastor Appointment Certificate dated June 8, 2001 Copy of DD Form 214 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active:...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-01075

    Original file (ND01-01075.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    While I was in the military I received two good conducts and two honorable discharge. Documentation In addition to the service record, 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): Active: USN 880817 - 920813 HON USN 920814 - 960523 HON Inactive: USNR (DEP) 880815 - 880816 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 960524 Date of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00849

    Original file (ND00-00849.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 880229 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (A). 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: “I'm trying to get a upgrade on my discharge, for I can receive a...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00368

    Original file (ND00-00368.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In the applicant’s issue 1, the applicant states that he was “young” and that his “knowledge about the military was nil” and the “navy did not counsel me they just punished me.” The applicant had significant misconduct, both in the service and in the civilian sector. Regardless of an Administrative Board's recommendation, CHNAVPERS is Separation Authority for members being separated by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense as evidenced by sexual perversion or sexual...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01367

    Original file (ND03-01367.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    No indication of appeal in the record.930203: 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 your service record.930205: Applicant advised of his rights and having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to appear before an Administrative Discharge Board. Evidence of continuing educational pursuits, a positive employment record,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00963

    Original file (ND00-00963.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION During the time immediately preceding my discharge, I was never approached by the Navy with any offer of advice, assistance or counseling. 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:

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00146

    Original file (ND99-00146.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND99-00146 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 981105, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to Honorable. The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. Decision A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 991004.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00097

    Original file (ND01-00097.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. Dear Sir/Madam:I am respectfully requesting a review of my records and the attached character references to upgrade my discharge from "Other Than Honorable" to "Honorable" as well as removing the re-enlistment code RE-4. He has clearly demonstrated a lack of maturity and responsibility in managing his financial and personal affairs.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00749

    Original file (ND00-00749.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 applicant’s issue 2, the Board found that the applicant’s violations of UCMJ Article 92 (failure to obey a lawful order) and Article 113 (misbehavior of a lookout) are serious offenses. In response to applicant’s issue 3, a medical diagnosis on active duty or during post-service, and whether proper or...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00979

    Original file (ND02-00979.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. Award: Extra duty for 30 days, reduction to SR. No indication of appeal in the record.921002: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.921112: Applicant advised of his rights and having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to appear before an Administrative Discharge Board. He...