Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-01054
Original file (ND00-01054.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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


ex-SN, USN
Docket No. ND00-01054

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 000915, 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 010301. 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 (verbatim)

1. I was told that accepting this discharge I would be able to have it upgraded in one year's time on the condition that I not have any problems with the law.
2. I was very young (17) when I was in boot camp admittedly I was very immature and could not handle the pressure and authority present. My girlfriend was pregnant and all I wanted was to go home, The attorney on base suggested this discharge as you don't want to be here and we don't want you here. I accepted.
 I have grown up alot in these 11 years & would like to correct my mistakes of the past. This discharge has prevented me from obtaining a job with the post office. All I ask is to be given a second chance and have my discharge upgraded.

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):
         Active: None
          Inactive: USNR (DEP)     871128 - 881002  COG
Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 881003                        Date of Discharge: 890526

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 00 07 24
          Inactive: None
Age at Entry: 17 Parental Consent                Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 99
Highest Rate: SN

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):
Performance: 2.80 (1)    Behavior: 2.80 (1)                OTA: NOB

 Military Decorations: None
Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: None

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: 36

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 :

881027:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence from 1100, 18Oct88 to 1500, 20Oct88 (2 days/surrendered).
         Award: Forfeiture of $391.05 per month for 1 month. No indication of appeal in the record.
881027:  Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (Unauthorized absence.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

890302:  Applicant to unauthorized absence from 0745, 2Mar89.

 890315:  Applicant disenrolled from the Nuclear Power Training Program for demonstrated unreliability, to wit: unauthorized absence.
890316:  Applicant apprehended by Orange County Police Department 1200, 16Mar89.
890405:  Applicant released to military control 1715, 5Apr89 (34 days/surrendered).
890405:  Applicant found fit for confinement.

 Separation package missing from service record.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT
REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 890526 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).
In response to applicant’s issue 1, the NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge (E). However, 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. No such error or injustice is evident in the applicant’s service record.

In response to applicant’s issue 2, the Board found that the applicant's age, education level, and test scores qualified him for enlistment. While he may feel that his immaturity was a factor that contributed to his action, the record clearly reflects his willful disregard for the requirements of military discipline and demonstrated that he was unfit for further service. The record is devoid of evidence that the applicant was not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions. Relief denied
The following is provided for the applicant’s edification. 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 15560A), effective 15 Jun 87 until 24 May 89, 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 | 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 | 2000_Navy | ND00-00483

    Original file (ND00-00483.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00483 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000306, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to General/under Honorable conditions. I turned myself in to take my punishment and make things right. After a review of the applicant’s service record and other evidence presented to the NDRB, in conjunction with cnsideration of the factors listed in paragraph 9.3 of the Manual for Discharge Review, it was determined that relief...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00538

    Original file (ND02-00538.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    As a result of this man's actions and the personal issues that already existed, I took it upon myself to resolve these problems and go home. No further information found in service record. 971002: Applicant to unauthorized absence 0550, 971002.Applicant declared a deserter.980131: Applicant from unauthorized absence 1215, 980131 (120 days/surrendered).980219: DD Form 214: Applicant discharged under other than honorable conditions in lieu of a trial by court-martial, authority:...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00879

    Original file (ND00-00879.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00879 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000707, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. to the staff, I was called to Command Master-Chief office for disobeying a lawful order. 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 | 1999_Navy | ND99-00570

    Original file (ND99-00570.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND99-00570 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 990318, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. The discharge shall remain: UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/Separation in lieu of trial by court martial, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630650. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00989

    Original file (ND03-00989.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-00989 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030522. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The NDRB also advised that the board first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00683

    Original file (ND03-00683.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. In the absence of the Applicant’s request for separation in lieu of court martial, the Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs and the Board found the discharge and characterization of service proper and equitable. The names, and votes of the members of the Board are recorded on the original of this document and may be obtained...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00533

    Original file (ND99-00533.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).In the applicant’s issue 1, the Board determined this issue is without merit. The applicant requested an Other Than Honorable separation in lieu of trial by court-martial for desertion (unauthorized absence for 50 days). The applicant was charged for unauthorized absence over 30 days and not for being unprofessional.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00500

    Original file (ND00-00500.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00500 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000314, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. I just wanted to be able to pursue my dream of becoming a police officer and to help society in helping keep law and order and peace in our country. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-01010

    Original file (ND02-01010.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    951211: Applicant from unauthorized absence 1519, 951211 (54 days/apprehended).960216: DD Form 214 discharged Applicant under other than honorable conditions in lieu of trial by court-martial, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630650.Separation package missing from service record. Upon review of the service record and documentation provided by the Applicant, the Board found no reason to refute the presumption of regularity regarding this case. Relief not warranted.is reminded that he...