Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00483
Original file (ND99-00483.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-SR, USN
Docket No. ND99-00483

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 990222, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. The applicant did not list any representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 991213. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, NDRB discerned no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the applicant’s service. The Board’s vote was unanimous that the character of the discharge shall not change. The discharge shall remain: BAD CONDUCT/Convicted by special court martial, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3640420.



PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

 Prior to the documentary discharge review, the applicant introduced no issues as block 8 on the DD Form 293 is blank.

Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
Statement in Support of Claim

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: USN                        None
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     820226 - 820311  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 820312               Date of Discharge: 850211

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 02 05 06
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 18                          Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 20

 Highest Rate: SN

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.60 (1)    Behavior: 3.60 (1)                OTA: 3.80

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: MUC, NEM, SSDR

Days of Unauthorized Absence: 141

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

BAD CONDUCT/Convicted by special court martial, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3640420.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

840328:  Report of Declaration of Deserter (NAVPERS 1600-3). Applicant declared a deserter on 831216 having been an unauthorized absentee since 0930, 831116 from USS PUGET SOUND (AD-38).

840331:  Surrendered to military authorities onboard SUBASE New London, Groton, CT (1340). Delivered onboard NAVSTA Philadelphia, PA 1504 840405. Retained onboard for disact/dispo.

840331:  Pretrial confinement.

840518:  Special Court Martial [trial date 840518]
         Charge I: violation of the UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence 831116 – 840331, [141 days/S.].
         Findings: to Charge I and specification 1 thereunder, guilty.
         Sentence: CHL for 80 days, forfeiture of $360 per month for 3 months, reduction to E-1, Bad Conduct discharge.
         CA 840611: Sentence approved and ordered executed.
        
840524:  Applicant waived clemency review.

840605:  Released from confinement.

 840719:  NMCCMR: The findings of guilty and sentence, as approved on review, are affirmed.
850104:  SSPCMO: Article 71c, UCMJ, having been complied with, Bad Conduct discharge ordered executed.            

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 850211 with a bad conduct due to convicted by a special court martial (A). The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (B). 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 introduced no decisional issues for consideration by the Board.

 Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

 A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560), Change 1/83, effective
28 Apr 83 until 14 Jun 87, Article 3640420, DISCHARGE OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL ADJUDGED BY SENTENCE OF COURTMARTIAL

B. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (Manual for Discharge Review, 1984), enclosure (1), Chapter 2, AUTHORITY/POLICY FOR DEPARTMENTAL DISCHARGE REVIEW.

C. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (Manual for Discharge Review, 1984), enclosure (1), Chapter 9, paragraph 9.2, PROPRIETY OF THE DISCHARGE.

D. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (Manual for Discharge Review, 1984), enclosure (1), Chapter 9, paragraph 9.3, EQUITY OF THE DISCHARGE.

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 obtain a copy of DoD Directive 1332.28 by writing to:
                  DA Military Review Boards Agency
                  Management Information and Support Directorate
                  Armed Forces Reading Room
                  Washington, D.C. 20310-1809

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:

                  Naval Council of Personnel Boards
                  Attn: Naval Discharge Review Board
                  Washington Navy Yard
                  720 Kennon Street SE Rm 309
                  Washington, D.C. 20374-5023     


Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00269

    Original file (ND01-00269.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, NDRB discerned no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the applicant’s service. 861121: Applicant from confinement.870123: Special Court Martial Charge I: violation of the UCMJ, Article 86: Specification: Unauthorized absence 0001, 25Sep86 to 1040, 19Nov86.Charge II: violation of the UCMJ, Article 92:Specification: Introduced liquor onboard RTC, Great Lakes, IL Charge...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00502

    Original file (ND99-00502.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :940421: Special Court Martial [trial dates 19, 20, 21 April 1994] Charge I: violation of the UCMJ, Article 128, (2) Specifications. 950911: NMCCCA: The findings of guilty and sentence, as approved on review, are affirmed.951201: SSPCMO: Article 71c, UCMJ, having been complied with, Bad Conduct discharge ordered executed. PART IV - INFORMATION FOR THE APPLICANT If you believe that the decision in your case is unclear, not responsive to...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-01196

    Original file (ND99-01196.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, NDRB discerned no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the applicant’s service. 841214: SSPCMO: Article 71c, UCMJ, having been complied with, Bad Conduct discharge ordered executed. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 850110 with a bad conduct due to convicted by a special court martial (A).

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00039

    Original file (ND00-00039.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-SKSR, USNDocket No. Applicant declared a deserter on 890801 having been an unauthorized absentee since 0001, 890701 from USS HAWES.890818: Report of Return of Deserter. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00196

    Original file (ND00-00196.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).In the applicant’s issue 1, the Board determined this issue to be without merit. 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,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00833

    Original file (ND99-00833.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-SR, USNR Docket No. ND99-00833 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 990601, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general. Issues (Equity Issue) Pursuant to 10 USC 874 (b) (UCMJ Article 74) and in accordance with SECNAVINST 5420.174C, enclosure (1), paragraphs 2.24 and 9.3, this former member requests the board’s clemency...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00991

    Original file (ND99-00991.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Specification 1: Unauthorized absence 870529 – 870825, [88 days/S.] PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 881229 with bad conduct due to convicted by special court martial (A). 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 introduced no decisional issues for consideration by the Board.

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00401

    Original file (ND99-00401.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In the acknowledgement letter to the applicant, he was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing. 870905: Special Court Martial Charge I: violation of the UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence 870601 – 870707, [37 days/A. 890512: Special Court Martial [trial dates 890512] Charge I: violation of the UCMJ, Article 85, (2) Specifications.

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00530

    Original file (ND99-00530.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND99-00530 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 990303, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The NDRB found the applicant’s Bad Conduct Discharge, awarded as a result of a Special Courts Martial conviction, proper and equitable. Relief denied.The applicant’s second issue (equity) states the reasons for his misconduct which resulted in his conviction at a Special Courts Martial and states that the conviction...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00167

    Original file (ND03-00167.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged on 19880603 with a bad conduct discharge which was the sentence adjudged by a properly convened special court-martial. Issue 1: The action of the NDRB is restricted to upgrades based upon clemency only (C, Part IV) for a discharge adjudged by a court-martial case tried under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. The names, and votes of the members of the Board are recorded on the original...