Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00837
Original file (ND03-00837.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-EMFN, USN
Docket No. ND03-00837

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20030409. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. The Applicant requests 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 20040312. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the Applicant’s service was discovered by the NDRB. 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 1910 - 142 (formerly 3630605).

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

 Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

1. “During all 28 months of military service as a Nuclear Operator, there was only one incident of misconduct. During all schooling conduct was good and grades received were high. Given the opportunity, I would have liked to become an excellent Sailor and serve many fruitful years in the military. The purpose of this request is to be allowed the ability to re-enlist into the military to serve my country once again.”

 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)     981211 - 990106  COG
         Active: None

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 990107               Date of Discharge: 010402

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 02 02 26
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 18                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 87

 Highest Rate: EM3

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.00 (4)    Behavior: 2.50 (4)                OTA: 3.03

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: None

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: 2

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-142 (formerly 3630605).

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

000925:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence from 0900, 000919 to 1600, 000921 (2 days).
         Award: Restriction and extra duty for 30 days, reduction to EMFN. Restriction and extra duty suspended for 6 months. No indication of appeal in the record.
000925:  Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (Unauthorized absence.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

001026:  Applicant indicted by the Ontario County Grand Jury. Applicant charged with third degree burglary and third degree grand larceny on 00907 and 00908 and third degree larceny and third degree grand larceny on 000714 and 000715. Applicant arraigned on 001115. Applicant sentenced on 010105 to a conditional discharge and ordered to make restitution in the amount of $6,159.40.

001207:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense and misconduct due to civil conviction.
001207:  Applicant advised of rights and having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to appear before an Administrative Discharge Board.
010216:  An Administrative Discharge Board, based upon a preponderance of the evidence and by unanimous vote, found that the Applicant had committed a serious offense and civil conviction, that the misconduct warranted separation, and recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions.

010315:  Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense and misconduct due to civil conviction.

010319:  COMNAVREG NE GROTON, CT 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 20010402 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 Applicant states his discharge was based on one isolated incident with no other infractions. T he Applicant’s service was marred by award of nonjudicial punishment (NJP) and a civil conviction. 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. An upgrade to honorable is inappropriate. It must be noted that most Sailors serve honorably and well and therefore earn honorable discharges. In fairness to those Sailors, commanders and separation authorities are tasked to ensure that undeserving Sailors receive no higher characterization than is due. Additionally, the NDRB has no jurisdiction over reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Navy. Neither a less than fully honorable discharge nor an unfavorable "RE" code is, in itself, a bar to reenlistment. A request for a waiver is normally done only during the processing of a formal application for enlistment through a recruiter. Relief denied.

The following is provided for the edification of the Applicant. 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 naval service. The NDRB is authorized, however, to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge to the extent such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the Applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review. Examples of documentation that should be provided to the Board include proof of educational pursuits, verifiable employment records, documentation of community service, and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities.

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 documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments or any other evidence pertaining to his discharge 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), Change 31, dated 20 Feb 01, effective 25 Jan 01 until 21 Aug 02, Article 1910-142 [formerly 3630605]. SEPARATION 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 | ND02-00576

    Original file (ND02-00576.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant's DD Form 214 Statement from Applicant, undated and unsigned PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: USN 940201 - 961020 HON Inactive: USNR (DEP) 940122 - 940131 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 961021 Date of Discharge: 980213 Length of Service (years, months,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00870

    Original file (ND99-00870.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND99-00870 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 990609, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. 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. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 980211 under other than...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00085

    Original file (ND03-00085.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In the acknowledgement letter to the applicant, she was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing. During the process of my discharge from the Navy, I was told that my discharge was going to be Convenience of the Government due to Pregnancy/or Childbirth. A review of the Applicant’s service record shows she did not meet the requirements to be discharged for misconduct due to commission of a serious...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00412

    Original file (ND99-00412.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MMFN (applicant) has no potential for further service. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 980423 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (A). Although the Board respects and appreciates the applicant’s over four years of service, the seriousness of the above offense is such that the Board found the characterization of the applicant’s discharge as Other Than Honorable...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600039

    Original file (ND0600039.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Specification 2: SN D_ (Applicant) did at fleet information warfare center on or about 11 Dec 00, with intent to deceive, make to his CPO an official statement during suspect’s rights acknowledgement statement state that he did not commit larceny which was totally false and was then known by SN D_ (Applicant) to be so false. The names, and votes of the members of the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00961

    Original file (ND02-00961.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. 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,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00735

    Original file (ND04-00735.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. There was nothing in the records, nor did the applicant provide any documentation, to indicate there existed error of fact, law, procedure, or discretion at the time of discharge. As of this time, the Applicant has not provided any documentation for the Board to consider.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00827

    Original file (ND00-00827.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    980709: 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 Naval Air Station, Norfolk Incident Complaint Report of 971129 for drinking under the age of 21 in violation of COMNAVBASENORVA/SOPA (ADMIN) HAMPINST 5400.1F; Naval Base, Norfolk Incident Complaint Reports of 970901 and 970905 for larceny of a car cover and larceny of four tires and rims; Naval Base,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01395

    Original file (ND03-01395.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:Applicant’s DD Form 214 (Member 1 and 4) DD Form 149, dated February 11, 2003 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 001129 - 001211 COG Active: None Period of Service Under...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00746

    Original file (ND04-00746.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.030129: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.030129: Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all...