Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600466
Original file (ND0600466.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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


 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

ex-AOAR, USN
Docket No. ND06-00466

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20060210 . 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 20061130 . 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 ization 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 - ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION


Decisional Issues :

Equity: Isolated incident
 Impropriety/ Equity: Dual punishment and disproportionate

Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Applicant’s DD Form 214 (Service 2)

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     19990722 - 19991107       COG
          Active: None
Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 19991108              Date of Discharge: 20010201

Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 0 1 02 23 (Does not in clude lost time.)
         Inactive: None

 Time Lost During This Period (days):
         Unauthorized absence: 15 day s
         Confinement:              25 day s

Age at Entry: 1 7 (Parental Consent)

Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 12                                 AFQT: 32

Highest Rate: AOAN

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 2 .0 ( 2 )              Behavior: 1 .0 ( 2 )                          OTA: 1 . 67

Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, (as listed on the DD Form 214): None


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 :

000705 :  Applicant to unauthorized absence at 0615 on 000705 .
000720 :  Applicant from unauthorized absence at 0615 on 000720 ( 16 days/surrendered ).
000911 :  Summary Court-Martial.
          Charge : violation of the UCMJ, Article 86 (1 Spec) : UA from unit 000705 to 000720. Plea : G uilty         Findings: Guilty
         Violation of the UCMJ, Article 123 (2 Specs) : With intent to defraud, forge (2) checks on or about 000402. Plea : Guilty         Findings: Guilty
         Violation of the UCMJ Article 121 (2 Specs): Wrongfully steal $350.00 on 000409.
         Plead: Spec 1 guilty     Findings: Guilty
         Plead: Spec 2 not guilty         Findings: Dismissed without prejudice
         Violation of the UCMJ Article 134 (1 Spec):
         Plead: not guilty        Findings: Dismissed without predjudice
          Finding: to Charge and the specification thereunder, guilty.
         Sentence: Forfeiture of $ 620.00 per pay for 1 month , reduced to E- 1 . Confinement for 30 days.
         CA action 000911 : Sentence approved and ordered executed .
        
001005:  Applicant released from confinement after serving 25 days of sentence. Given 5 days credit for good behavior.
001211 :  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with the least favorable characterization of service as under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.

001211 :  Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult with counsel, elected to waive all rights except the right to obtain copies of the documents used to support the basis for the separation.

001211 :  Commanding Officer, USS PELELIU (LHA 5), recommended to Commander, Amphibious Group THREE that the Applicant be discharged under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense. Commanding Officer’s comments: “ AOAR M_ (Applicant) was convicted at Summary Court-Martial for unauthorized absence, theft and forgery of another’s personal checks. This behavior is absolutely intolerable and flies in the face of the Navy’s core values. I simply cannot allow AOAR M_ to continue on active duty given this behavior. I cannot afford to have a Sailor who demonstrates such extremely poor judgement. It is my strongest recommendation that AOAR M_ be discharged from the Naval Service with a discharge characterized as Other Than Honorable. AOAR M_ is not recommended for reenlistment and has absolutely no potential for future service in any military organization. ”
010112 :  COMPHIBGRU THREE, directed t hat the Applicant be di scharge d under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to commission of serious offense.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion
The Applicant was discharged on 20010201 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 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 Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (E).
The Applicant states his discharge was based on “one isolated incident in 26 months of service” and requests upgrade of the characterization of his discharge to honorable. 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 a summary court martial proceeding for violations of UCMJ Articles 86 (unauthorized absence), 121 (larceny), and 123 (forgery). Violations of Articles 121 and 123 are considered serious offenses for which a punitive discharge is authorized at courts martial. Th e 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 also alleges that his punishment was unjust because he was punished twice and that his punishment was inequitable because it was disproportionate for the offense. The Board reviews the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge individually, on a case-by-case basis. If such a review reveals an impropriety or inequity, relief is in order. Regulations permit relief on equitable grounds if the Applicant’s discharge is inconsistent with standards of discipline of the Naval service. Based upon available records, nothing indicates that the Applicant’s punishment at summary courts martial or his subsequent discharge was in any way inconsistent with the standards of discipline in the United States Navy. A preponderance of the evidence reviewed supports the conclusion that the Applicant committed a serious offense, that his subsequent separation from the Naval service was appropriate, and that an other than honorable conditions characterization was warranted. As such, 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 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), 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. 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 121 (larceny) and 123 (forgery).

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 Instruction 1332.28, you may submit a complaint in accordance with Enclosure (5) of that Instruction . You should read Enclosure (5) of the Instruction 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 Instruction 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 | 2005_Navy | ND0501306

    Original file (ND0501306.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). I recommend that he be separated from the United States Navy with an Other Than Honorable discharge.”011115: COMSUBGRU TWO directed the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct commission of a serious offense. The Applicant states, “after 3 years of good service I made a mistake.” Despite a...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500641

    Original file (ND0500641.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). Award: Restriction and extra duty for 15 days.971024: Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (Commanding Officers NJP held on 23 October 1997 for violation UCMJ Article 86 – Unauthorized absence), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.971211: NJP for...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501019

    Original file (ND0501019.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests her 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: USNR (DEP) 19930205 - 19930524 COG Active: USN 19930525 - 19960710 HON Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 19960711 Date of Discharge: 20010427 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 04 09 17 (Does not exclude lost time.) I most strongly recommend that...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00855

    Original file (ND02-00855.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Specification 2: Larceny of gasoline on 960428 ($17.17). Specification 10: Larceny of ring on May96. Specification 12: Larceny of ring on May96 ($150.00).

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600675

    Original file (MD0600675.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). ), necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.050501: Applicant’s personal statement to the Commanding General, 1 st Marine Division.050502: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge as under other than honorable conditions by reason of a pattern of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-01272

    Original file (ND04-01272.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In the acknowledgement letter, the Applicant was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing. 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.The applicant requests that the Board afford him all due consideration regarding...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500003

    Original file (ND0500003.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. Charge II: violation of UCMJ, Article 92 (3 specs): Spec1: Failure to obey a lawful order. Also, the Applicant pled guilty at a special court-martial to violations of Articles 86 (2 Specs, UA for a total of 40 days), 92 (3 Specs), 123, and 134.

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700070

    Original file (MD0700070.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a thorough review of the Applicant’s record, issues submitted, and post service accomplishments, the Board determined that clemency was not warranted and that the sentence awarded the Applicant at his court-martial, as approved, was appropriate for the offenses he committed.In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of Government affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant. ...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500619

    Original file (ND0500619.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 but inequitable (B, C, and D).The Applicant contends that his discharge was a penalty that was disproportionate to the offense for which he was court-martialed, especially when he had no knowledge of the incident for which charges were preferred. The Applicant's misconduct is documented in his service record, which is marred by a...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00446

    Original file (ND03-00446.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant’s DD Form 214 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 981117 - 990929 COG Active: None Period of...