Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01187
Original file (ND03-01187.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-AD3, USN
Docket No. ND03-01187

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20030630. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The Applicant requests a documentary record review. The Applicant did not designate a representative on the DD Form 293. Subsequent to the application, the Applicant obtained representation from the Disabled American Veterans.

Decision

A documentary review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20040514. 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 - convicted by a civil court for offense(s) occurring during current term of military service, authority: MILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

“1. I feel an “Other Than Honorable” discharge was not appropriate, because it was based on one isolated unintentional incident. I was not a disciplinary problem while on active duty, in which I served 8 years.”

“2. I have not been a disciplinary problem during my incarceration, and I have continued to positively better myself while helping others in any way possible.”

Additional issues submitted by Applicant’s counsel/representative (DISABLED AMERICAN VETERANS):

3. “After a review of the Former Service Members (FSM) DD Form 293 Application for the Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the Armed Forces of the United States and all of the evidence assembled for review, we continue to note the contention of the appellant in his request for a discharge upgrade of the current Other Than Honorable to that of General, Under Honorable Conditions.

The FSM served on active service from November 15, 1998 to May 18, 1990 at which time she was discharged due to Misconduct – Convicted by a Civil Court for offense occurring during current term of military service.

As the FSM has submitted documentation in support, we as the representative, ask that consideration be given to equitable relief, as this is a matter that involves a determination whether a discharge should be changed under the equity standards, to include any issue upon which the applicant submits to the Board’s discretionary authority, under SECNAVINST 5420.174C.

The FSM had five years of good service, contributed multiple hours of volunteer service to the community. She was arrested and convicted for murder that was done in self-defense to save her own life, and not a pre-meditated act.

We ask for the Board’s careful and sympathetic consideration of all the evidence of record used in rendering a fair and impartial decision. These issues do not supersede any issues previously submitted by the applicant.

Respectfully, K_ L. G_ National Service Officer.”

 Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Copy of DD Form 214
Applicant’s letter to the Board dtd May 19, 2003
Copy of court transcript
Letter of Recommendation [undated, unsigned]

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     810817 - 820110  COG
         Active: USN                        820111 - 851114  HON

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 851115               Date of Discharge: 900518

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 04 06 04
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 21                          Years Contracted: 6

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 49

 Highest Rate: AD3

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.7 (4)     Behavior: 3.8 (4)                 OTA: 3.7

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: GCM, LoC

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/Misconduct -convicted by a civil court for offense(s) occurring during term of military service, authority: MILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

890307:  Civil Conviction: Superior Court, State of California found Applicant guilty of homicide.
Sentence: 25 years to life imprisonment.

890310:  NIS Report in service record.

890928:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to civil conviction.
890929:          Applicant advised of her rights and having consulted 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.

891017:  Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to civil conviction.

900413:  CHNAVPERS recommended to the Secretary of the Navy that Applicant be discharged with an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions by reason of misconduct due to a civilian conviction.

900425:  Assistant Secretary of the Navy (M&RA) approved discharge.

900427:  CNMPC directed the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to civil conviction.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged in absentia on 19900518 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to civil conviction (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 her discharge was based on one isolated incident in “8 years.” Despite a servicemember’s prior record of service, certain serious offenses, even though isolated, warrant separation from the naval service in order to maintain proper order and discipline. When the service of a member of U.S. Navy has been honest and faithful, it is appropriate to characterize that service as honorable. An Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge 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. The Applicant’s record is marred by a civil conviction of first-degree murder. The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, reflects her willful failure to meet the requirements of her contract with the U.S. Navy and falls far short of that required for an upgrade of his characterization of service. Relief denied.

Issue 2. 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 the civilian life subsequent to leaving the service. Normally, to permit relief, a procedural error or inequity must have been found to have existed during the period of enlistment in question. Outstanding post-service conduct, 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, is considered. While the applicant did submit one undated and unsigned letter, the applicant has not provided sufficient documentation of good character and conduct. Relief denied.

Issue 3. The NDRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge, is authorized to change the character of service and/or the reason for discharge if such change is warranted. There is no evidence of impropriety or inequity in the Applicant’s discharge. The Applicant’s misconduct is clearly documented. Therefore, relief is 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 documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments or any other evidence related to her discharge at that time. Representation at a personal appearance hearing is recommended but not required. If a personal appearance hearing is not feasible, the Applicant may petition the Board for Correction of Naval Records, using the enclosed DD Form 149.


Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

 A. The Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560A, Change 8, effective
21 Aug 89 until 14 Aug 91) Article 3630600, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT.

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 | ND02-01171

    Original file (ND02-01171.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    My discharge from the Navy came from a civilian conviction; the US Navy should not give me a dishonorable based on civilian law. 960716: Naval Investigative Service report in service record.960729: Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to civil conviction. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged, in absentia, on 960815 under other than honorable conditions for...

  • USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-00573

    Original file (MD01-00573.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    This was my first brush with trouble.After a review of the Fortner Service Members (FSM) DD Form 293 Application for the Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the Armed Forces of the United States and all of the evidence assembled for review, we continue to note the contentions as set forth on the application by the appeallant of an upgrade of his current Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge to that of Honorable.The record reflects the FSM served in the United States Navy from...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00632

    Original file (ND03-00632.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. “To the Honorable Discharge Review Board; I request to have my discharge up-graded. 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 | 2002_Navy | ND02-01096

    Original file (ND02-01096.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged, in absentia, on 950221 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (A). The official record notes he was charged with murder by civilian authorities, a serious offense for which a punitive discharge and a life sentence is authorized. Evidence of continuing educational pursuits, a positive employment record, documentation of community...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01168

    Original file (ND03-01168.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-01168 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030624. Service members service record; Midway (CV-41), (NMCB-40), compared to PSD North Island, along with all medical records obtainable and VA medical records, statements of support (copies), service members statement and all other records pertaining to discharge upgrade.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00844

    Original file (ND01-00844.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a review of the Former Service Members (FSM) DD Form 293 Application for the Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the Armed Forces of the United States and all of the evidence assembled for review, we continue to note the contentions as set forth on the application by the appellant of an upgrade of his current Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge to that of General, Under Honorable Conditions The record reflects the FSM served in the United States Navy from July 4, 1987 to...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01100

    Original file (ND03-01100.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. “After a review of the Former Service Members (FSM) DD Form 293 Application for the Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the Armed Forces of the United States and all of evidence assembled for review, we continue to note the contention of the appellant in his request for a discharge upgrade of his current Other Than Honorable Discharge to that of Honorable.The FSM served on...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00786

    Original file (ND00-00786.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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: USNR 900802 - 930620 HON Inactive: USNR (DEP) 900115 - 900801 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 930621 Date of Discharge: 950608 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 01 11 18 Inactive: None The applicant's service is...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00014

    Original file (ND99-00014.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND99-00014 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 980928, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. This agreement was never kept by Petty Officer P______.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00113

    Original file (ND04-00113.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable and a narrative reason for separation change. “Dear Chairperson:After a review of the Former Service Members (FSM) DD Form 293 Application for the Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the Armed Forces of the United States and all of evidence assembled for review, we continue to note the contention of the appellant in his request for a discharge upgrade of the current General...