Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00876
Original file (ND02-00876.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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


ex-YNSN, USN
Docket No. ND02-00876

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 020607, 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 030228. 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. I am a father of 3 and upgrading my discharge will give me a chance to use my G. I. Bill to continue my education and establish a future for my children and family. I'm currently working for a temporary agency as a Marketing Assistant for Manpower staffing and I would like to peruse a career in business.
*I have requested but do not have a copy of my DD-214.

 Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Applicant's résumé

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     None
          Active: USN      R                 880711 - 910523  HON
Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 910524               Date of Discharge: 960410

 Length of Service (years, months, days):
         Active: 04 10 17
          Inactive: None
Age at Entry: 22                          Years Contracted: 6
Education Level: 12 1/2           AFQT: 31

 Highest Rate: YN3
Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.32 (5)    Behavior: 3.24 (5)                OTA: 3.36
Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: MUC, SSDR, NDSM, NEA, GCM

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: 179
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 :

950629:  Applicant declared a deserter.
951217:  Applicant apprehended by civil authorities 1015, 951217 at Marietta, GA. Applicant returned to military control 1105, 951217.
960219:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 85: Desertion on 0730, 950521 to 951217.
         Award: Forfeiture of $581 per month for 2 months, restriction for 60 days, reduction to YNSN. No indication of appeal in the record.
960222:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.
960222:  Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights.

960223:  Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.

960302:  BUPERS directed the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense (desertion).

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 960410 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to the 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 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 should have been 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 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 | 2002_Navy | ND02-01099

    Original file (ND02-01099.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Sentence: Confinement for 30 days, 2 months HLWOC, forfeiture of $500.00 pay per month for 2 months, reduction to E-2. 960322: Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights.960326: Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense as evidenced by your Commanding officer's NJP on 950427, and your special...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00252

    Original file (ND02-00252.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00252 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020114, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. OSSR E_ (Applicant) is recommended to receive an Other Than Honorable Discharge from the naval service. Relief denied.The applicant is reminded he remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing provided an application is received within 15 years from the date of discharge

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01011

    Original file (ND03-01011.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-01011 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030516. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. “Dear Board Members,Applicant), the reason I am submitting this letter is I respectfully request to have my discharge from the Naval Service of Under Other Than Honorable Conditions upgraded to an Honorable Discharge.I have been in Federal Law Enforcement, as a Police Officer (GS-0083)...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-01114

    Original file (ND01-01114.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I served 90% of my enlistment & was given an other than honorable discharge, and because of it I cannot now apply for certain jobs. 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. The applicant did not provide any of these documents.

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00814

    Original file (ND99-00814.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND99-00814 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 990528, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions and the reason for the discharge be changed to RE-1. YNSN___(applicant’s) commission of serious offenses, pattern of misconduct, and inability to conform to naval standards of conduct, discipline, and performance provide the basis for my decision to separate YNSN____(applicant) from...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00775

    Original file (ND04-00775.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. Decision A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20041029. Therefore, no relief will be granted.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.

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00426

    Original file (ND99-00426.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION Issues (verbatim) (EQUITY ISSUE) His violation of the UCMJ nothwithstanding, this former member opines that his otherwise creditable service period is sufficient to warrant separation under honorable condition.2. You may obtain a copy of DoD Directive 1332.28 by writing to: DA Military Review Boards Agency Management Information and Support Directorate Armed Forces Reading Room Washington, D.C. 20310-1809The names, and votes of the members of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00750

    Original file (ND00-00750.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-ENFA, USN Docket No. NDRB also advised that the board first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing. 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.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00726

    Original file (ND04-00726.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). 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. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00694

    Original file (ND04-00694.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. In the acknowledgement letter, the Applicant was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary record review prior to any personal appearance hearing. 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...