Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500705
Original file (ND0500705.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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


 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

ex-ET3, USN
Docket No. ND05-00705

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20050321. The Applicant requests that his 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 designate a representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20051027. After a thorough review of all available 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 characterization of the discharge shall not change. The discharge shall remain Under Other Than Honorable Conditions by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense .

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

 Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

“CHANGE REQUESTED TO HELP OBTAIN A BETTER JOB. THIS WAS THE FIRST TIME I WAS SENT TO CAPTAINS MAST. I RECEIVED A GOOD CONDUCT MEDAL.”
Documentation
The Applicant did not provide additional documentation for the Board’s consideration.

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     19991029 – 20000501               COG
         Active: None

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 20000502             Date of Discharge: 20040320

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 03 10 09
         Inactive: None

 Time Lost During This Period (days):
         Unauthorized absence: none
         Confinement:              none

 Age at Entry: 18

Years Contracted: 4 (24 month extension)

 Education Level: 12                                 AFQT: 97

 Highest Rate: ET2

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 2.6 (5)              Behavior: 2.2 (5)                 OTA: 2 .56 (5)

 Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, (as listed on the DD Form 214): Good Conduct Medal, National Defense Service Medal.


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

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

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

991029:  Enlistment waiver approved for 1 non-minor misdemeanor (simple assault), chart “C” offense.

030329:  Comments contained in evaluation report dated 29 Mar 2003 – “shown occasional problems with military bearing” and “counseled several times for sleeping during the work day and insubordination”.

040215:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 128: Assault another member of Reactors Controls Division.    Award: Reduction to E-3. No indication of appeal in the record.

040315:  Comments contained in evaluation report dated 15 Mar 2004 – “substandard Sailor who requires constant supervision”; “disqualified all nuclear watches, he cannot be trusted to stand watch”; “convicted of assault on another member of Reactor Controls Division this incident was preceded by an assault on a shipmate”; “has attended a disciplinary review board, anger management therapy”.

Service Record did not contain the Administrative Discharge package.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion
The Applicant was discharged on 20040320 by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (A and B) with a service characterization of under other than honorable conditions. 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). The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (E).

 When the service of a member of the U.S. Navy has met the standard of acceptable conduct and performance, 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. Despite the servicemember’s previous service and behavior, certain serious offenses warrant separation from the naval service in order to maintain proper order and discipline. The record documents nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for a violation of UCMJ Article 128 (assault). A violation of Article 128 is defined as the commission of a serious offense, the misconduct for which the Applicant was separated. Separation under these conditions generally results in a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. Relief is not warranted.

The Veterans Administration determines eligibility for post-service benefits not the Naval Discharge Review Board. There is no requirement or law that grants recharacterization based on the issue of obtaining Veterans' benefits and this issue does not serve to provide a foundation upon which the Board can grant relief. Additionally, the Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the purpose of enhancing employment, housing or educational opportunities. Regulations limit the Board’s review to a determination on the propriety and equity of the discharge.

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 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 did not submit documentation for the board’s consideration.

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 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), re-issued October 2002, effective 22 Aug 02 until 25 April 2005, Article 1910-142 [formerly 3630605], SEPARATION BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT - COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE.

B. The Manual for Courts-Martial authorizes the award of a punitive discharge if adjudged as part of the sentence upon conviction by a special or general court-martial for violation of the UCMJ, Article 128 (assault).

C. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part V, Para 502, Propriety .

D. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part V, Para 503, Equity .

E. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part II, Para 211, Regularity of Government Affairs .

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 “ http://Boards.law.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:

                  Secretary of the Navy Council of Review Boards
                   Attn: Naval Discharge Review Board
                   720 Kennon Street SE Rm 309
                  Washington Navy Yard DC 20374-5023

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-01225

    Original file (ND04-01225.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. T_ K_ (Applicant)” 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) 010821 - 010926 COG Active: None Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment:...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00421

    Original file (ND03-00421.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) can make changes to reenlistment codes.The Veterans Administration determines eligibility for post-service benefits not the Navy Discharge Review Board. As this time, the Applicant has not provide any documentation for the Board to consider.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00955

    Original file (ND04-00955.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. “My discharge was inequitable because it was based one isolated incident in 26 months of separation with no other adverse action due to this issue the narrative reason for separation was misconduct. My separation should have been based on my non-compliance and or disability.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500375

    Original file (ND0500375.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. 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. This misconduct resulted in two separate nonjudicial punishment proceedings for violations of UCMJ Articles 91, 92, and 128.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500490

    Original file (ND0500490.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION It has been my dream, since I was very young, to defend my country by serving in the military.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00083

    Original file (ND03-00083.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214. 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, D, and E).Issue 1. At this time, the applicant has not provided any documentation for the Board to consider.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500858

    Original file (ND0500858.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). I was still discharge.” When that was over I was discharged.”

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501241

    Original file (ND0501241.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION Petty Officer First Class C_ G_ cursed at me for having the cheeseburger while on watch. 910221: Applicant advised of his rights and following consultation with counsel, elected to appear before an Administrative Discharge Board.910423: An Administrative Discharge Board, based upon the preponderance of evidence and by unanimous vote, found that the Applicant had committed misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense, that such...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500591

    Original file (ND0500591.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to uncharacterized and the reason for the discharge be changed to “entry level separation”. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION In Appendix 12 of the Manual for Courts-Martial, a punitive discharge is authorized for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Article 89, disrespect toward superior commissioned officer, Article 110, hazarding a vessel, and Article 134,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500298

    Original file (ND0500298.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant’s DD Form 214 (2) USN Honorable discharge certificate Certificate of award of the Navy Achievement Medal PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR...