Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600297
Original file (ND0600297.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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


 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

ex-BMSN, USN
Docket No. ND06-00297

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20051207 . 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 20061019 . 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 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:

“ I felt it was hard of a discharge because I had 2 months left in and the situation of the discharge was a lack of communication. And its been 2 years and I feel that I have learned and grown up a lot in life and self respect. I am in coll e ge now it has been a year I am planning on being a teacher and I feel that this shou l dn’t reflect on what I want to become i n life. So I ask you for your request in upgrading my discharge. ”
Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Applicant’s DD Form 214
 Honor Society Membership Invitation
Education Major Identification ltr from, D_ W_, dtd November 7, 2005
 Certificate of Graduation for completing the INFONXX Customer Service Representative training program
Transcript

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     19990730 - 19990810       COG
          Active: None
Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 19990811              Date of Discharge: 20030620

Length of Service (years, months, days):

          Active: 0 3 1 0 1 0
         Inactive: None

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

Age at Entry: 1 9

Years Contracted: 4 ( 12 -month extension)

Education Level: 12                                 AFQT: 42

Highest Rate: SN

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 2 . 5 ( 4 )              Behavior: 1 . 7 ( 4 )                  OTA: 2 . 63

Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, (as listed on the DD Form 214): Battle “E” Ribbon, National Defense Service Medal, Sea Service Deployment Ribbon , Expert Rifleman Medal, Expert Pistol 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 :

010524:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 121: Larceny.
         Award: Forfeiture of $607.35 pay per month for 1 month, restriction and extra duty for 30 days, reduction to E-2 (suspended for 6 months). No indication of appeal in the record.
020219:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence.
 Violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Dereliction of duty.
         Award: Forfeiture of $692. 7 0 pay per month for 1 month, restriction and extra duty for 30 days. No indication of appeal in the record.
020502 :  Commanding Officer, USS INCHON (MCS 12) to SN Terrence C. Carter Adverse Performance Evaluation Report for the period 20010716 to 20020502 .
030616:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Failure to obey order or regulation.
         Award: Reduction to E-3, restriction for 30 days. No indication of appeal in the record.
0 30617 :  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with the least favorable characterization of service under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct commission of a serious offense.

0 30617 :  Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult with counsel , elected to waive all rights.
0 30618 :  Commanding Officer, Helicopter Mine Countermeasures Squadron recommended to Commander, Mine Warfare Command that Applicant be discharge d under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct commission of a serious offense . Commanding Officer’s comments : “ BMSN C_ (Applicant) elected to fraudulently misuse his government travel credit card despite documented training and counseling. This is his third NJP offense since joining the Navy. I am recommending the separation of BMSN T_ C_ (Applicant) due to commission of a serious offense, with a characterization of service as Other Than Honorable. BMSN C_ (Applicant) does not meet the standards that are required to be a productive Sailor .”
030619:  Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (Failure to obey order or regulation), assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning (not signed).

030620 :  GCMCA, Commander, Mine Warfare Command authorized the Applicant's discharge d under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct commission of a serious offense.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion
The Applicant was discharged on 20030620 by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (A and B) with a service characterization under other than 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 claims his discharge was hard because he only had 2 months left in service. 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. 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 service was marred by one retention warning, 3 nonjudicial punishment proceedings for violations of Articles 86 (unauthorized absence), 92 (Dereliction of duty and Failure to obey order or regulation) and 121 (Larceny) of the UCMJ. For the edification of the Applicant violation of Article(s) 92, and 121 are considered commission of a serious offense (COSO). 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 and falls far short of that required for an upgrade of his characterization of service. Relief is not warranted.

The Applicant states “It’s been 2 years and I feel that I have learned and grown up a lot in life and self respect. 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 the service. The NDRB is authorized to consider outstanding post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge, 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. After a complete review of the entire record, including the evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board determined that the discharge was appropriate and that the evidence of post-service conduct was found not to mitigate the conduct, which precipitated the discharge. Relief denied.

The Applicant states “I am planning on being a teacher and I feel that this shouldn’t reflect on what I want to become in life”. 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. 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 documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments or any additional evidence related to this 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), re-issued October 2002, effective 22 Aug 02 until Present, 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 s 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation) and 121 (Larceny).

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 .

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 | 2006_Navy | ND0600281

    Original file (ND0600281.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). As of this time, the Applicant has not provided any post-service documentation for the Board to consider. 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

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501340

    Original file (ND0501340.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable or general (under honorable conditions). After serving for 2 years, 3 months and 11 days, this Applicant was Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharged and separated for misconduct authorized by MILPERSMAN 3630600. Additionally, she pled guilty to defrauding the government of over $3,000.00 through similar means for a separate travel claim last...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501009

    Original file (ND0501009.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    “Propriety or Equity Issue(s): The Administrative Discharge packet includes an error in the materials used by board members who deliberated on the Applicant’s board.Statement: In accordance with 32 CFR § 724, and SECNAVINST 5420.174D, the Veterans of Foreign Wars submits to the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) the above issue and following statement in supplement to the Applicant’s petition Time Lost During This Period (days): Unauthorized absence: 2 days Confinement: 25 days Age at...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600564

    Original file (ND0600564.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. No indication of appeal in the record.040727: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense with the least favorable characterization of service as general (under honorable conditions).040802: Applicant found physically qualified for separation.040803: Applicant advised of rights and having...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600015

    Original file (ND0600015.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). As of this time, the Applicant has not provided any post-service documentation for the Board to consider. The NDRB has no authority to provided additional review of this case since Applicant’s discharge occurred more than 15 years ago.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501071

    Original file (ND0501071.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND05-01071 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20050614. The Applicant requests the Discharge 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) Appointment of Veterans Service Organization as Claimant’s Representative, dtd June 7,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-01119

    Original file (ND04-01119.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND04-01119 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20040629. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. History of present illness: This 27 year old male, BM2 U.S. Navy with nine years and nine months of broken service, was admitted to ARD at Naval Hospital, Pensacola, on 26 November 1990 for inpatient alcohol rehabilitation.Discharged diagnosis: 1.)

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00652

    Original file (ND04-00652.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND04-00652 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20040309. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. I honestly believe that if I had met my wife back then, that I could have been a career sailor.

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600135

    Original file (MD0600135.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD06-00135 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20051026. 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 Administrative discharge board found that the Applicant had committed misconduct based on a pattern of misconduct, but the President of the board reported that they had found he...

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600183

    Original file (MD0600183.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Marine gun shot wound was through and through. Each one of the Applicant’s violations of Article 92 adjudicated on 20030620 and the Applicant’s violations of Articles 115 and 121 of the UCMJ individually made the Applicant eligible for separation by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense. As of this time, the Applicant has not provided any post-service documentation for the Board to consider.