Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00032
Original file (ND04-00032.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-ABEAN, USN
Docket No. ND04-00032

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20031001. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to entry level separation or uncharacterized. 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 20040712. 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. “I N_ M_ (Applicant) would like to respect your decisions regarding my status of citizenship and discharge status. I respectfully request your most sincere decision based on this issue. Thank you very much and may God bless this informal letter.”

 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)     000928 - 001024  COG
         Active: None

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 001025               Date of Discharge: 011010

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 00 11 16         Does not exclude lost time
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 27                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 14                        AFQT: 41

 Highest Rate: ABEAN

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: NMF*                 Behavior: NMF             OTA: NMF

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: None

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: 2

*No marks found in service record.

 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 :

010714:  Applicant’s voluntary statement to a Special Agent of the United States Naval Criminal Investigative Service.
010729:  Summary Court-Martial.
         Charge I: violation of the UCMJ, Article 81:
         Specification: Conspire to commit larceny on 020616.
         Charge II: violation of the UCMJ, Article 107:
         Specification: Sign a false official record NAVPERS 107/602 on 010618.
         Charge III: violation of the UCMJ, Article 115 (2 specs):
         Specification 1: Feign mental derangement on 010722.
         Specification 2: Intentionally injure himself on 010728.
         Charge IV: violation of the UCMJ, Article 121:
         Specification: Steal basic allowance for housing with dependents on 010715.
         Charge V: violation of the UCMJ, Article 123:
         Specification: Intent to defraud by offering a false certificate of marriage on 010616.
         Charge VI: violation of the UCMJ, Article 134:
         Specification: Wrongfully and intentionally jump from USS ENTERPRISE on 010722.
         Finding: Not found in service record.
         Sentence: Confinement for 30 days, forfeiture of $694.00, reduction to ABEAR. [Extracted from Commanding Officer’s letter dated 010902.]
         CA action not found in service record.

010830:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.
010831:  Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights.
010902:  Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.

010903:  COMCRUDESGRU TWELVE 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 20011010 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 all available 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. When a Sailor’s service has been honest and faithful, it is appropriate to characterize that service under honorable conditions. Characterization of service as other than honorable 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 service was marred by the award of a summary court-martial (SCM) on 1 occasion for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) to include articles 81, 107, 115, 121, 123, and 134. 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 do not meet the criteria for an Entry Level Separation (ELS) characterization of service. The evidence of record and statements provided by the Applicant does not demonstrate that the Applicant was not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions. Relief 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 additional documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments or any other evidence relating 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 | ND02-01027

    Original file (ND02-01027.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-01027 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020715, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions. 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) 990730 - 991004 COG Active:...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00865

    Original file (ND03-00865.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-00865 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030424. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions and the reason for the discharge be changed to hardship. The Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) also advised that the Board first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00774

    Original file (ND00-00774.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 1, the Board found that alcohol/drug dependency is not an issue. In response to applicant’s issue 2, the Board has no authority to change re-enlistment codes or make recommendations to permit re-entry into the Naval Service or any other of the Armed Forces. There was nothing in the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00028

    Original file (ND01-00028.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    It is, therefore, recommended that Seaman Apprentice (applicant) be separated administratively from the Naval Service under General (Under Honorable conditions). 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 issues state: “I have been a good citizen since discharge.” and “I have been working and saving money to go to college.” The applicant...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01389

    Original file (ND03-01389.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-01389 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030820. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: None Active: None Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 970418 Date of Discharge: 980624 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 01 02 07 Inactive: None

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-01041

    Original file (ND99-01041.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Issues (verbatim) Submitted by DAV: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 find the FSM is seeking an upgrade in her discharge to General.The FSM contends that being separated from her family caused a severe amount of stress on her. The FSM was undergoing mitigating circumstances that caused her to attempt suicide. After a...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00710

    Original file (ND01-00710.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Decision A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 011127. 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: “My discharge was improper because I honestly am not a thief and I believe that if I was given another chance I would have better represented myself. The applicant did not provide any documentation to...

  • 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 | 2000_Navy | ND00-00226

    Original file (ND00-00226.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 990127 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (A and B). • the specific circumstances of the offense warrant separation; • the offense would warrant a punitive discharge per MCM, Appendix 12 for the same or closely related offense. Pers-8 will direct processing for separation if the case is substantiated for child sexual abuse.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01398

    Original file (ND03-01398.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable, general/under honorable conditions, entry level separation and uncharacterized. “My name is J_ M. R_ (Applicant). ]990517: DD Form 214: Applicant discharged under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-142.