Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00014
Original file (ND01-00014.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-PNSN, USN
Docket No. ND01-00014

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 001004, 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 010313. After a thorough review of the records, 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 1910-106 (formerly 3630650).

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues (verbatim)

1. My discharge was inequitable because it was based on one incident in 25 months of active service. As a personnelman I went out of my way to succeed and advance as shown by my personnel records. I completed many courses and qualifications beyond what was required, and was half way through my ESWS. I made a mistake and went UA because I was angry. It was a bad decision I don't think I should be punished for it. The situation was; in May of 1998 I was accepted into the ROTC Program at Purdue University in Indiana. I was excited about the future ahead of me. I moved my family and belongings to Indiana. Two weeks before I was scheduled to attend the University, the medical board denied me the scholarship because of childhood asthma. If I had no problem getting in the U.S. Navy with asthma I seen no excuse whey I could not proceed with the ROTC program. Instead of going through the proper channels to get it waived and continue my advancement, I took it upon my self to go UA. I regret the decision I choose and wish you to reconsider my discharge. I wish to rejoin the Naval Reserves, and to do that I need my discharge change. Thank you for your time, and considering my requested change.


 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)     951207 - 960728  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 960729               Date of Discharge: 991130

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 03 04 02
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 18                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 88

 Highest Rate: PNSN

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.50 (2)    Behavior: 4.00 (2)                OTA: 3.48

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: AFSM, AFEM, Letter of Commendation, SSDR

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: 447

 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 :

980721:  Applicant to unauthorized absence 0700, 21Jul98.

980721:  Applicant missed ship's movement.

 980819:  Applicant from unauthorized absence 2018, 19Aug98 (29 days/surrendered).
980820:  Applicant to unauthorized absence 700, 20Aug98.

 980821:  Applicant declared a deserter having been on unauthorized absence since 0700, 20Aug98. Remarks: Applicant surrendered after 29 days UA. Applicant left again before next muster....
991013:  Applicant from unauthorized absence 0800, 13Oct99 (418 days/surrendered).
991118:  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.

Partial separation package missing from service record.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT
REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 991130 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, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper and equitable (D and E).

In response to the applicant’s issue, the applicant implies that a permissive doctrine exists whereby one in the military is allowed one "incident". The Board considers the applicant’s 447 days of unauthorized absence to be a very serious “incident”. The Board believes that the applicant is confusing this with the civilian world wherein some offenses are treated with leniency because they are a first time incident on an otherwise clear record. No such leniency exists in the military. The applicant is responsible for his actions and must accept the consequences of his misdeeds. The Board will not grant relief on the basis of this issue.

The following is provided for the applicant’s edification. The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge (E). 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 18, effective
12 Dec 1997 until 10 July 2000, Article 1910-106 (formerly 3630650), SEPARATION IN LIEU OF TRIAL BY COURT-MARTIAL.

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 | 2002_Navy | ND02-01078

    Original file (ND02-01078.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-01078 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020726, 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’s service was marred by award of one nonjudicial punishment, one summary court-martial, and an unauthorized absence for a period more than 30 days.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00967

    Original file (ND00-00967.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00967 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000816, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable and the reason for the discharge be changed to Personal Hardship. The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. 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...

  • 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 | 2004_Navy | ND04-00365

    Original file (ND04-00365.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant’s DD Form 214 (2) Orientation/Registration information Spring 2004 Applicant’s DD Form 215 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: USNR...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-01289

    Original file (ND02-01289.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-01289 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020917, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The Applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events : 990917: Applicant to unauthorized absence 2400, 990917.000619: Applicant from unauthorized absence 1145, 000619 (276 days/surrendered).000825: Charges preferred to special court-martial for violation of...

  • 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 | 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 | 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 | 2004_Navy | ND04-00395

    Original file (ND04-00395.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND04-00395 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20040109. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to entry level separation or uncharacterized. 030303: Charges preferred to special court-martial for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) Article 86: Unauthorized absence from 1700, 021213 to 1950, 030228 (75 days/surrendered).030303: Applicant requested an administrative...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00984

    Original file (ND02-00984.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00984 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020701, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. The Applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. requested an administrative discharge under other than honorable conditions in lieu of a trial by court-martial after admitting he was guilty of unauthorized absence for 318 days.