Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00847
Original file (ND02-00847.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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


ex-RMSA, USN
Docket No. ND02-00847

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 020603, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable or 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 030221. 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. To whom it may concern:
 In 1994, I was discharged from the United States Navy. My rating was Under Other Than Honorable. I had a minor fraction of writing a few bad checks. Up till that time, and also till my discharge, I kept a clean, motivated military record. I realize that those checks were a mistake and was wrong on my part.
Through my experience in the Armed Forces, I now have matured into a self-motivated, hard working young man. I now wish to continue and further my education to better the life of my children and myself with the help of G.I. Bill. After recent inquiry, I've found that with my discharge rating, I'm unable to use my education funding.
With all due respect, please consider changing my discharge rating to HONORABLE. This would be greatly appreciated.

 Once again, I apologize for my action.
Thank you in advance for considering my request in this matter.
Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Copy of DD Form 214
Letter from Applicant

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     900125 - 900605  COG
         Active: USN                        None
Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 900606               Date of Discharge: 940228
Length of Service (years, months, days):

          Active: 03 08 23
          Inactive: None
Age at Entry: 18                          Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 33
Highest Rate: RMSN

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):
Performance: 3.60 (3)    Behavior: 3.00 (4)                OTA: 3.53

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM, OSR(2), Sharpshooter Pistol Ribbon, Marksman Rifle Ribbon
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 :

931112:  Summary Court-Martial.
         Charge I: violation of the UCMJ, Article 123a: (2 Specifications ):
         Specification 1 : Uttering check without sufficient funds on 930704 for $400.00; Specification 2 : Uttering check without sufficient funds on 930804 for $900.00. Charge II: violation of UCMJ, Article 134: (8 Specifications ): Specification 1 : Failure to pay just debts on 930704 for $22.94; Specification 2 : Failure to pay just debts on 930804 for $228.00; Specifications 3 through 8 : Wrongfully obtain services during 9307 for a total of $123.88.
         Finding: to Charge I and specifications 1 and 2 thereunder, guilty. To Charge II and specifications 1 through 8 thereunder, guilty.
          Sentence: Hard Labor without confinement for 45 days, reduced to E-2.
          CA action 931207: Sentence approved and ordered executed.
931223:  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 a Summary Court-Martial on 12 November 1993.
931223:  Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights.
940105:  Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.

940127:  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 940228 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. The Veterans Administration determines eligibility for post-service benefits, not the NDRB. There is no requirement or law that grants recharacterization solely on the issue of obtaining veterans’ benefits and this issue does not serve to provide a foundation upon which the Board can grant relief. The Applicant’s discharge characterization accurately reflects his service to his country. 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, 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 5, effective
05 Mar 93 until 21 Jul 94, 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 | ND00-00045

    Original file (ND00-00045.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Decision A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 000713. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION 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).The Board found that the applicant had several very serious violations of the UCMJ.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00351

    Original file (ND03-00351.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. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged on 19940307 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (A). Issue 1: After a review of the Applicant’s service record, in conjunction with consideration of the factors listed in paragraph...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00828

    Original file (ND02-00828.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Letter from Applicant Copy of DD Form 214 Copy of DD Form 215 Service Related Information Listing from Applicant dated November 16, 2002 (2) Copy of DD Form 215 Status Request Letter from Applicant to NDRB PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00022

    Original file (ND02-00022.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00022 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010924, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. 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 the discharge was inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident in 41 months of service with no other adverse...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00860

    Original file (ND01-00860.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In the acknowledgement letter to the applicant, he was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing. 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) 890626 - 900624 COG Period of Service...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00171

    Original file (ND01-00171.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    But yet I think still of my discharge. 961205: Chief of Naval Personnel recommended to Assistant Secretary of Navy (Manpower and Reserve Affairs) the applicant be discharged under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense. 961219: BUPERS directed the applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00043

    Original file (ND00-00043.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Attendance Reference Letter for Advanced Life Insurance Seminars Letter of Completion for Fraternal Insurance Counselor designation Modern Woodmen of America Article Pictures from Agency Development Award Ceremony (2pgs) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: USN None Inactive: USNR (DEP) 881209-890122 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 890123 Date of Discharge: 920603 Length of Service (years, months,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-01014

    Original file (ND00-01014.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    930805: Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense. At this time, the applicant has not provided any documentation of good character and conduct. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00947

    Original file (ND00-00947.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00947 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000728, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. 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. Violation of UCMJ, Article 123A (4 specifications): Specification 1: Presented a check for...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00246

    Original file (ND00-00246.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    No indication of appeal in the record.930804: USS AUSTIN (LPD-4) notified applicant of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and misconduct due to commission of a serious offense. Relief not warranted.The applicant’s second issue states: “(DAV's Issue) The FSM is contending the discharge General, Under Honorable Conditions is inequitable due to an injury incurred while on active duty. The names,...