Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00960
Original file (ND99-00960.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-AMEAN, USN
Docket No. ND99-00960

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 990709, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. 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 000331. 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: UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/IN LIEU OF TRIAL BY COURT MARTIAL, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630650.

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:
Copy of DD Form 214 (2 copies)
Statement from applicant

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: None
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     930716 - 930718  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 930719               Date of Discharge: 950407

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 01 08 19
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 18                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 58

 Highest Rate: AMEAN

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 2.80 (1)    Behavior: 3.00 (1)                OTA: 3.20

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM

Days of Unauthorized Absence: 28

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/IN LIEU OF TRIAL BY COURT MARTIAL, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-106 (formerly 3630650).

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

930720:  Applicant advised being retained in the naval service, despite defective enlistment and induction due to fraudulent entry into naval service as evidenced by your failure to disclose your pre-service civil/drug involvement, to wit: Receiving stolen property Sep91.

930902:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 128: Aggravated assault. [Extracted from Administrative Remarks dated 930902. No further information found in service/medical records.]

930902:  Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (Aggravated assault.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

950227:  Applicant placed of pretrial restriction.
950227:  Charges preferred to special court-martial for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) Article 86 (6 specs): Unauthorized absence from 2200, 17Dec94 to 2200, 20Dec94 (3 days), 0730, 22Dec94 to 0930, 12Jan95 (20 days), 0645, 13Jan95 to 1100, 17Jan95 (4 days), 0700-1300, 18Jan95, and 0645, 16Feb95 to 1330, 17Feb95 (1 day) and Article 92: Failure to obey a lawful order on 18Jan95and Article 92: Failure to obey a lawful order.

950306:  A pplicant requested an administrative discharge under other than honorable conditions in lieu of a trial by court-martial. He consulted with counsel and was fully advised of the implications of his request. The applicant stated he understood the elements of the offense(s) with which he was charged, and admitted he was guilty of all the charges preferred against him. Specifically, he admitted to violating UCMJ, Article 86 (3 specs): Unauthorized absence. The applicant stated he was completely satisfied with the counsel he had received. The applicant understood that if discharged under other than honorable conditions, it might deprive him of virtually all veterans' benefits based upon his current enlistment, and that he might expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life in situations wherein the type of service rendered or the character of discharge received therefrom may have a bearing

 950309:  The commanding officer, exercising GCMCA, approved the request for an administrative separation in lieu of a trial by court-martial, and directed applicant’s discharge.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 950407 under other than honorable conditions in lieu of a trial by court-martial (A and B). The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (C). 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 (D and E).

 The following is provided for the applicant’s edification. The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. The applicant must be aware that 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 the civilian life subsequent to leaving the service. Normally, to permit relief, an error or injustice must have been found to have existed during the period of enlistment in question. Outstanding post-service conduct, 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, may be considered by the NDRB. The applicant is reminded that he is eligible for a personal appearance hearing provided the application is received within 15 years from the date of discharge. Representation at personal appearance hearing is highly recommended.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

 A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 9, effective
22 Jul 94 until 2 Oct 96, Article 3630650, PROCEDURES FOR PROCESSING ENLISTED PERSONNEL FOR SEPARATION IN LIEU OF TRIAL BY COURTMARTIAL.

B. A punitive bad conduct discharge may be adjudged for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Article 86, unauthorized absence, upon conviction by a Special or General Court-Martial, in accordance with the Manual for Courts-Martial.

C. 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.

D. 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.

E. 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 St SE Rm 309
                  Washington, D.C. 20374-5023     


Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00033

    Original file (ND03-00033.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    980407: DD Form 214: Applicant discharged under other than honorable conditions in lieu of a trial by court-martial, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-106. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged on 19980407 under other than honorable conditions in lieu of a trial by court-martial (A and B). After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00380

    Original file (ND99-00380.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Medical records from Weems Community Mental Health Center (36 pages) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: USNR (DEP) 910619 - 920603 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 920604 Date of Discharge: 930224 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 00 08...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00578

    Original file (ND99-00578.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND99-00578 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 990412, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. Decision A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 000121. The discharge shall remain: UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/IN LIEU OF TRIAL BY COURT MARTIAL, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630650.The NDRB did note an administrative error on the original DD Form 214.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00636

    Original file (ND02-00636.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00636 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020408, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. The NDRB agrees the Applicant's service was equitably characterized based on a total of 168 days of unauthorized absence. At this time, the applicant has not provided such documentation for the Board to consider.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00087

    Original file (ND00-00087.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 (D and E).The applicant introduced no decisional issues for consideration by the Board. 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 | 2002_Navy | ND02-01013

    Original file (ND02-01013.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-01013 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020711, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. 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 additional documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments at that time.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00867

    Original file (ND01-00867.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Thank you for your time and consideration, Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: USNR (DEP) 960723 - 961209 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 961210 Date of Discharge: 970807 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 00 07 28 Inactive:...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00643

    Original file (ND04-00643.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND04-00643 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20040309. The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review. A_ C_ (Applicant).”

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-01040

    Original file (ND02-01040.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-01040 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020722, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. The Applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Letter from Pastor K_ F_ Copies of DD Form 214 (2) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00863

    Original file (ND99-00863.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-SMSN, USN Docket No. ND99-00863 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 990611, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. Relief to a fully Honorable discharge is, however, not warranted.The applicant’s second issue states: “I have been very involved in the Children’s Ministry at my Church and in Latino Affairs at the...