Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00382
Original file (ND00-00382.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-RMSN, USN
Docket No. ND00-00382

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 000203, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. The applicant listed the American Legion as his representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 000831. 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/Separation in lieu of trial by court martial, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630650.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

1. (Equity Issue) This former member opines that his refusal to participate in a conspiracy by his command to cover-up illegalities that occurred during Desert Storm forced him to go UA. On this basis, he petitions to Board's relief.

2. (Equity Issue) This former member further requests that the Board include provisions of SECNAVINST 5420.174C., enclosure (1), Chapter 9, as it pertains to post-service conduct, in assessing the merits of his application.

 Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
Copy of DD Form 214 (2 copies)

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: None
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     881203 - 881213  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 881214               Date of Discharge: 920317

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 03 03 04
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 18                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 27

 Highest Rate: RM3

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.30 (2)    Behavior: 3.43 (3)                OTA: 3.40

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: SASM with Bronze Star, NDSM, SSDR, NUC

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: 76

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/separation in lieu of trial by court martial, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630650.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

900420:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Failing to go to place of duty.
         Award: Forfeiture of $100 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 20 days. No indication of appeal in the record.
900420:  Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (Failing to go to place of duty.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

 910812:  Applicant to unauthorized absence 0730, 12Aug91.

910828:  Applicant from unauthorized absence 1300, 28Aug91.

910913:  Applicant to unauthorized absence since 0745, 13Sep91.

911013:  Applicant declared a deserter.

911104:  Applicant apprehended by civilian authorities at Auburn, ME, 2241, 4Nov91. Returned to military control 2303, 4Nov91.

911106:  Applicant found fit for confinement.

920317:  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 920317 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 applicant’s first issue states: “(Equity Issue) This former member opines that his refusal to participate in a conspiracy by his command to cover-up illegalities that occurred during Desert Storm forced him to go UA. On this basis, he petitions to Board's relief.” The applicant provided no documentary evidence for the Board’s consideration in support of this issue. Relief is not warranted.

 The applicant’s second issue states: “(Equity Issue) This former member further requests that the Board include provisions of SECNAVINST 5420.174C., enclosure (1), Chapter 9, as it pertains to post-service conduct, in assessing the merits of his application.” The following is provided for the applicant’s edification. The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the re characterization 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 provided no documentation for the Board’s consideration to support this issue. Relief is not warranted.




Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

 A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), effective 15 Aug 91 until
04 Mar 93, 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 [e.g., 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 | 2002_Navy | ND02-00019

    Original file (ND02-00019.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00019 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010927, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. 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).Issues 1 and 2 state that the applicant’s discharge was inequitable because it was based on a couple of isolated but linked incidents after 26...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-01234

    Original file (ND99-01234.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events : Discharge package missing from service record.970214: Applicant to unauthorized absence 0630, 14Feb97. No relief warranted based on this issue.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00317

    Original file (ND02-00317.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. Thank you, Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:None PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 920617 - 920726 COG Active: None Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 920727 Date of Discharge: 940826 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 02...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00179

    Original file (ND00-00179.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    These documents were not attached to his application and the NDRB did correspond with applicant and requested he provide these documents. Applicant's request for discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial not contained in service record. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 850301 under other than honorable conditions in lieu of a trial by court-martial (A and B).

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00008

    Original file (ND01-00008.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 970109 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 discharge was proper and equitable (D and E).The applicant’s issue states: “I would like a chance to receive school benefits and a change in service record.” There...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00077

    Original file (ND03-00077.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Verifiable proof of any post-service accomplishments must be provided in order for the Applicant to claim post-service conduct and behavior as a reason to upgrade a less than honorable discharge. At this time, the Applicant has not provided any verifiable documentation of good character and conduct to mitigate his misconduct while on active duty. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00369

    Original file (ND00-00369.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    911002: Applicant from unauthorized absence 1300, 2Oct91 (100 days/surrendered).911231: DD Form 214: Applicant discharge under other than honorable conditions in lieu of a trial by court-martial, and directed applicant’s discharge.Discharge package missing from service record. 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).In the applicant’s issue 1, the Board...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00240

    Original file (ND01-00240.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 890210 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 discharge was proper and equitable (D and E).In the applicant’s issue 1, the Board found nothing in the records nor did the applicant submit any supporting...

  • 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 | 2002_Navy | ND02-00477

    Original file (ND02-00477.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).Issue 1: The Applicant requested that the Board consider the humanitarian and emotional factors that led to his decision to assist his mother. He requested to be discharged in lieu of trial by court-martial as a result of his extended unauthorized absence. Normally, to permit relief, the discharge or...