Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00269
Original file (ND00-00269.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-SKSN, USN
Docket No. ND00-00269

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 991220, 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 010329. 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 (verbatim)

1. Prior to my final discharge in 1995 I had received a honorable discharge in1992.
Due to adverse situation in my second enlistment 1992 - 1995 while serving over seas (Italy) Sami Island tour. 3 deaths I returned to states from brother in law, father in law and my parental grandfather. Stress was a major factor. In my not keeping all the records from the last funeral I attended which lead to my discharge. Thank you for considering this request 1988 - 1992 did received a honorable discharge be reenlisting. While separating I was inform that this was up to me to handle on my own. I truly need this for many reasons.

 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: USN                        880330 - 920227  HON
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     880325 - 880329  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 920228               Date of Discharge: 950203

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 02 11 06
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 28                          Years Contracted: 3

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 41

 Highest Rate: SK3

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.80 (3)    Behavior: 3.80 (3)                OTA: 3.80

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: MUC, GCM, BEA, NDSM

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

 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 formerly 3630650.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

941209:  Applicant for psychiatric screening: A/P: Normal routine psychiatric screen. Applicant not expressing any psych behavior which would warrant further W/u.
950203:  DD Form 214: Applicant discharged under other than honorable conditions in lieu of a trial by court-martial.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 960203 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).

 Although the applicant’s discharge package is missing from the service record, the Board assumes regularity unless the applicant can provide anything to indicate or to show that there exists an error of fact, law, procedure, or discretion associated with his discharge at the time of its issuance, and that his rights were prejudiced thereby. The applicant has submitted no documentation to prove that his discharge was improper or inequitable. The applicant’s issue 1 addresses the fact that he had 3 deaths in his family when he “returned to the states” and was “under stress.” The Board does not find this an adequate reason to upgrade a discharge to honorable. No relief will be granted based on this issue.

There is no law or regulation that provides for the upgrade of an unfavorable discharge based solely on the passage of time, or good conduct in the civilian life subsequent to leaving the Service. However, the Board is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge (D). Those factors include, but are not limited to, the following: evidence of continuing educational pursuits (transcripts, diplomas, degrees, vocational-technical certificates), a verifiable employment record (Letter of Recommendation from boss), documentation of community service (letter from the activity/community group), certification of non-involvement with civil authorities (police records check) and proof of his not using drugs (detoxification certificate, AA meeting attendance or letter documenting participation in the program) in order for consideration for clemency based on post-service conduct. At this time, the applicant has not provided any documentation of good character and conduct. Therefore no relief will be granted. The applicant is encouraged to continue with his pursuits and is reminded that he is eligible for a personal appearance hearing provided the application is received within 15-years from the date of discharge.

 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 for a period more than 30 days 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 view DoD Directive 1332.28 and other Decisional Documents by going online at “ afls14.jag.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:

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


Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00082

    Original file (ND00-00082.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00082 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 991019, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. In the acknowledgement letter to the applicant, the applicant was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-01203

    Original file (ND99-01203.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND99-01203 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 990913, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. 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 NDRB found the applicant’s third issue non decisional.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00568

    Original file (ND01-00568.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant can provide additional documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments at that time. 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. The names, and votes of the members of the Board are...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00742

    Original file (ND02-00742.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00742 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020502, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under 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 (D and E).The Applicant contends his discharge was inappropriate because the Command knew he was in jail for the three-month...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00512

    Original file (ND03-00512.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-00512 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030210. The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review. I am asking you to please review my case and consider upgrading my discharge to Honorable.”

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01142

    Original file (ND03-01142.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-01142 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030618. The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review. 910511: Applicant apprehended by civilian authorities at 1920, 910511 and returned to military control 1953, 910511 (292 days/apprehended).910702: DD Form 214: Applicant discharged under other than honorable conditions in lieu of a trial by court-martial, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630650.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-01066

    Original file (ND02-01066.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-01066 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020723, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant's DD Form 214 Character reference, undated Character reference, dated April 22, 2002 Character reference, undated Five pages from Applicant service (not previously available to...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00058

    Original file (ND04-00058.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    _______________________________________________________________________ In accordance with 32 C.F.R., section 724.166, and SECNAVINST 5420.174C, enclosure (1), paragraph 1.16, The American Legion submits to the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB or Board) the above issue and following statement in supplement to the Applicant’s petition.The service record is incomplete. 951004: Applicant discharged There is no law or regulation, which provides that an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00047

    Original file (ND99-00047.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    discharge. The Board found the applicant had requested an Administrative Discharge Board (ADB) in lieu of a Special Court Martial on 27 Feb 97 in order to avoid the possibility of a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge. Further, applicant’s submitted issue contains text admitting having been UA by stating “…I wanted out, and off of that ship.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00368

    Original file (ND04-00368.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant’s DD Form 214 (2) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 930311 - 930419 COG Active: None Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 930420 Date of...