Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600914
Original file (ND0600914.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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


 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

ex-AZ2, USN
Docket No. ND06-00914

Applicant ’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20060628 . The Applicant requests the Discharge 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 20070419 . 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 s hall 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 – Quality of service

Equity – Isolated and minor offenses

Equity – Punishment was too harsh

Propriety – Basis for discharge


Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant , was considered:
Applicant ’s DD Form 214 (Member 1 and 4) (2)
Evaluation Report and Counseling Record for period June 2, 2004 to March 15, 2005
Evaluation Report and Counseling Record for period June 16, 2002 to March 15, 2003
Six pages from Applicant ’s service record
Navy and Marine Corps Achievement Medal certificate, dated March 31, 2001

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     19990313 - 19991101       COG
         Active: None
Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 19991102              Date of Discharge: 20050526

Length of Service (years, months, days):

          Active: 05 06 25
         Inactive: None

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

Age at Entry: 1 9

Years Contracted: 4 ( 37 -month extension)

Education Level: 12                                 AFQT: 38

Highest Rate: AZ2

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.8 (8 )                        Behavior: 3.4 ( 8 )                  OTA: 3 . 55

Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, (as listed on the DD Form 214): National Defense Service Medal, Enlisted Aviation Warfare Specialist Insignia, Global War on Terrorism Service Medal, Navy and Marine Corps Achievement Medal, S ea Service Deployment Ribbon (2), Navy Good Conduct Medal (period ending 02Nov01 ) , Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal, Meritorious Unit Commendation Ribbon, Navy Unit Commendation Ribbon


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

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

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

050408 :  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 80: Attempts.
Violation of UCMJ, Article 121 : Larceny .
         Award: Forfeiture of $ 938.00 per month for 2 month s , restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to E- 4 . No indication of appeal in the record.

 050524 :  Commanding Officer , Naval Air Station, Whidbey Island, directed discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.


Service Record did not contain the Adm inistrative Discharge package.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion
The Applicant was discharged on 20050526 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 presumption of regularity of governmental affairs was applied by the Board in this case in the absence of a complete discharge package (E).
Equity – Quality of service: The Applicant contends that her discharge should be upgraded because she had good evaluations, awards and decorations, and a prior honorable discharge.

Equity – Isolated and minor incident: The Applicant contends that her discharge should be upgraded because her record of court-martial convictions involved isolated and minor offenses.

Equity – Punishment too harsh: The Applicant contends that he r discharge should be upgraded because the “punishment was too harsh. ”

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. During the period of service under review, the Applicant’s record was marred by nonjudicial punishment proceedings for violations of Articles 80 (attempts, forgery) and 121 (larceny) of the UCMJ. Violation of UCMJ Articles 80 and 121 are considered serious offenses for which a punitive discharge is authorized if adjudged by a special or general court martial. The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of her service, reflects her willful failure to meet the requirements of her contract with the U.S. Navy and falls far short of that required for an upgrade of her characterization of service. Relief is not warranted.

Propriety – Basis for discharge: The Applicant contends that she was told the she was going to be discharged for medical reasons.

The NDRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an Applicant's discharge, will change the reason for discharge if such a change is warranted. The summary of service clearly documents the misconduct due to commission of a serious offense was the basis for which the Applicant was discharged. Since no other Narrative Reason for Separation could more clearly describe why the Applicant was discharged, a change would be inappropriate.
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 11, effective
26 April 2005 until Present, Article 1910-142, 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 80 (attempts, forgery) 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 .

 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 | 2004_Navy | ND04-00387

    Original file (ND04-00387.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ” _______________________________________________________________________ In accordance with 32 C.F.R., section 724.166; SECNAVINST 5420.174C, enclosure (1), paragraph 1.16, The American Legion submits to the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB or Board) the above issue in supplement to the Applicant’s petition. 900703: Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.900718: CNMPC directed the...

  • 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 | 2009_Navy | ND0900416

    Original file (ND0900416.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The NDRB reviews discharges on a case-by-case basis and no evidence can be found in the Applicant’s service record to support his statement. The NDRB is not reviewing other service member’s misconduct or administrative or disciplinary actions against them. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant...

  • 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 | 2006_Navy | ND0600466

    Original file (ND0600466.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Decisional Issues: Equity: Isolated incidentImpropriety/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:...

  • 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 | 2000_Navy | ND00-00800

    Original file (ND00-00800.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Every since my discharge. 970606: Applicant refused treatment for alcohol/substance abuse behavior.970613: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under Other Than Honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the Commission of a serious offense and misconduct due to Drug abuse.970613: Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ, Article 27B, elected to waive all rights except the right to obtain copies of the...

  • 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 | 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 | 2010_Navy | ND1001196

    Original file (ND1001196.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    However, the Board recommended by a vote of 3 to 0, that the Applicant receive a General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization of her service at discharge. The Separation Authority approved the recommendation for discharge, directing that the basis for separation be MISCONDUCT (Serious Offense) – having determined that the evidence of record supported the basis for discharge – and that the characterization of service, as recommended by the chain of command and the discharge board,...