Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501052
Original file (ND0501052.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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


 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

ex-DCFN, USNR(TAR)
Docket No. ND05-01052

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20050608. The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. 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 20060224. 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 and reason for discharge shall not change. The discharge shall remain General (Under 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:

“While I do not dispute the charge against me, I must point out the fact that I earned my G.I. Bill during my first enlistment which I completed Honorably earning a good conduct award during this time also my misconduct an unauthorized absence occurred during my second enlistment, and should not affect the status of my college benefits.”

 Applicant marked the box “I HAVE LISTED ADDITIONAL ISSUES AS AN ATTACHMENT TO THIS APPLICATION.” None were found.
Documentation
Only the service record was reviewed. 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)       19890320 - 19900220      ELS
                  USNR (DEP)       19900223 - 19901123      ELS
         Active:  USNR     19910627 - 19950709      HON

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 19950710             Date of Discharge: 19970901

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 02 01 22 (Does not exclude lost time.)
         Inactive: None

 Time Lost During This Period (days):
         Unauthorized absence:    31 days
         Confinement:                       None

 Age at Entry: 25

 Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 11 (GED)                          AFQT: 66

 Highest Rate: DC3

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: NA*                                    Behavior: NA*             OTA: NA*

 Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, (as listed on the DD Form 214): Navy “E”, Naval Reserve Sea Service, Navy Good Conduct, National Defense Service Medal, Sea Service Deployment Ribbon
* Not Available


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

UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL)/MISCONDUCT, authority: MILPERSMAN, Article 3630605.
Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

950710:  Reenlisted this date for a term of 4 years in USNR(TAR).
970622:  Applicant to unauthorized absence at 0730 on 970622.

970721:  Applicant declared a deserter.

 970723:  Applicant from unauthorized absence on 970723 (31 days). [Extracted from DD Form 214, Block 29.]
970725:  NJP. No further information found in service record. [Extracted from NAVPERS 1070/604, Awards.]

970901:  DD Form 214: Applicant discharged under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.

Service Record did not contain the Administrative Discharge package.
Service Record was missing elements of the Summary of Service.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion
The Applicant was discharged on 19970901 by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (A and B) with a service characterization of general (under honorable conditions). After a thorough review of the 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).

 Normally, to permit relief, an impropriety or inequity must have existed during the period of enlistment in question. No such impropriety or inequity is evident during the Applicant’s enlistment. When the service of a member of the U.S. Navy has been honest and faithful, it is appropriate to characterize that service as honorable. A general (under 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. T he Applicant’s service was marred by an unauthorized absence of 31 days and the award of nonjudicial punishment. Under applicable regulations, a violation of UCMJ Article 86, unauthorized absence in excess of 30 days is considered a serious offense. The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, reflects his willful failure to meet the requirements of his contract with the U.S. Navy. Such conduct falls far short of that expected of a member of the U.S. military and does not meet the requirements for an upgrade of his characterization of service. 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 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. Additionally, the Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational opportunities. Regulations limit the Board’s review to a determination on the propriety and equity of the discharge.

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. 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 14, effective
03 Oct 96 until 971212, Article 3630605, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL 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 86, unauthorized absence in excess of 30 days.

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 | 2001_Navy | ND01-00521

    Original file (ND01-00521.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00521 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010314, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. 980608: Letter of Deficiency issued by Applicant's counsel.980610: Commanding officer directed the applicant's discharge with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense. The applicant did not provide any documentation of her post-service.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-01048

    Original file (ND02-01048.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 (C and D).Issue 1: The Applicant states his discharge was based on one isolated incident in “82 months of service with no other adverse action.” Even though the civilian world treats some offenses with leniency because they are a first time incident on an otherwise clear record, the military does not view such offenses as...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00460

    Original file (ND00-00460.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    971121: Applicant's statement.971203: Commanding officer directed discharge general (under honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense. 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 inequitable because there are no charges or counseling sheets providing that I committed...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01214

    Original file (ND03-01214.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    As the representative, we 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 SECNAVIST 5420.174C. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500110

    Original file (ND0500110.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION While the Applicant’s medical record clearly documents the seriousness of the injury the Applicant sustained, there is no evidence to suggest that the Applicant’s misconduct was a result of those injuries.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500560

    Original file (ND0500560.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Applicant discharged by reason of misconduct due to a commission of a serious offense with a characterization of general (under honorable conditions). The NDRB is, however, 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500404

    Original file (ND0500404.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION The Applicant contends that his discharge was improper and inequitable because: • It is an injustice for him “to continue to suffer the adverse consequences of his discharge.” • His “marks were very good.” • “…this was an isolated offense.” • He “faced racial discrimination.” • His “punishment was too severe compared to todays standards” and “worse than most people got for the same offense.” • That his “command abused its authority,” “did not...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500340

    Original file (ND0500340.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Time Lost During This Period (days): Unauthorized absence: 13 days Confinement: None Age at Entry: 30 Years Contracted: 4 (12 month extension) Education Level: 16 AFQT: 79 Highest Rate: ABH3 (SW, AW) Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks): Performance: NA* Behavior: NA* OTA: NA* Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501467

    Original file (ND0501467.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). 980406: Applicant missed ship’s movement.981117: Applicant from unauthorized absence at 1755 on 981117 (227 days/apprehended).990115: DD Form 214: Applicant discharged under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense - absent without leave - 30 days or more, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00481

    Original file (ND02-00481.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00481 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020308, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. We also respectfully request that the board consider each reasonable explanation submitted by the (FSM) who now wishes to correct the general character of his discharge to Honorable. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was...