Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00280
Original file (ND01-00280.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-ABFC, USN
Docket No. ND01-00280

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 010109, 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 designate a representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 010615. 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 1910-106 (formerly 3630650).

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues (verbatim)
1. I believe the discharge was not proper as I received four Good Conduct Medal after serving almost 16 years in the Naval Service Honorably. In my request for discharge I never admitted to what I was charged for as you can see in my letter submitted. I also would like to be compensated for my accrued leave earned that was taken from me, when I departed the Naval Service.

2. I would also like to say that the charges brought against me were mixed up with ABFC R_ as when he was charged these are the same charges that were on his paperwork. I strongly feel the command had had information when dealing with this case. They never once asked me what my side was. I also feel that since the captan received a letter belittling him all he wanted to do was get rid of everyone that was listed in the letter.

 Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
Applicant's Leave and Earning Statement for Period Covered (1-29 FEB00)
Admin Discharge Package (4 pages)
Applicant's Charge Sheet (3 pages)
Applicant's Statement concerning proposed discharge action

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: USN                        900808 -960404   HON
                                             840625 - 900807  HON
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     830708 - 840624  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 960405               Date of Discharge: 000308

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 03 11 04
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 30                          Years Contracted: 6

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 50

 Highest Rate: ABFC

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages : All enlisted performance reports were available to the Board for review.

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: MUC(4), SSDR(5), LOC, NAM(3), OSR(2), NDSM, SWASM, NCM(2)

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 1910-106 (formerly 3630650).

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

960405:  Reenlisted for 6 years at NavHosp Corpus Christi.

 000120:  Charges preferred to special court-martial for Charge I: violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) Article 92 (2 Specs):
 Spec 1: on board USS ABRAHAM LINCOLN, during the period of February 1997 to about Dec 1999, fail to obey a lawful general regulation to wit: para 1165.2.c. U.S. Navy Regions, 1990 by wrongfully having an unduly familiar personal relationship with Aviation Boatswain's Mate (Fuels) Third Class M_ S. J_, U.S. Navy.
Spec 2: on board USS ABRAHAM LINCOLN, during the period of February 1997 to about Dec 1999, fail to obey a lawful general regulation to wit: para 1165.2.c. U.S. Navy Regions, 1990 by wrongfully having an unduly familiar personal relationship with Aviation Boatswain's Mate (Fuels) Airman S_ B_, U.S. Navy.
Charge II: violation of the UCMJ Article 134 (3 Specs):
Spec 1: a married man, did, at or near Vancouver, British Columbia Canada in or about Feb 1997, wrongfully have sexual intercourse with Aviation Boatswain's Mate (Fuels) Third Class M_ S. J_, U.S. Navy, a single woman not his wife.
Spec 2: a married man, did, at or near Everett, Washington in or about Feb 1997, wrongfully have sexual intercourse with Aviation Boatswain's Mate (Fuels) Third Class M_ S. J_, U.S. Navy, a single woman not his wife.
Spec 3: a married man, did, at or near Hobart, Australia in or about Nov 1998, wrongfully have sexual intercourse with Aviation Boatswain's Mate (Fuels) Third Class M_ S. J_, U.S. Navy, a single woman not his wife.
000208:  A pplicant requested an administrative discharge under other than honorable conditions in lieu of a trial by court-martial. He was apprised of and afforded the right to consult with counsel. He waived his right to consult with counsel but 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, Articles 92 and 134. 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.

000222:  CO, USS ABRAHAM LINCOLN recommended that the applicant's request be approved and the characterization be Under Other Than Honorable.

000302:  COMCRUDESGROUP THREE, exercising GCMCA, approved the request for an administrative separation in lieu of a trial by court-martial, and directed applicant’s discharge Under Other Than Honorable Conditions.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT
REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 000308 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 issues 1 and 2, the Board found that t o permit relief, an error or injustice must be found to have existed during the period of enlistment under review. There was nothing in the records, nor did the applicant provide any documentation, to indicate there existed an error of fact, law, procedure, or discretion at the time of discharge. There was no rights violation and no basis for relief. The applicant signed his Request for Separation in Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial on 8 Feb 2000. In paragraph 3 of that document, the applicant admits guilt to violation of UCMJ Article 92. The Board will not grant relief concerning this issue. In addition, the Board does not take into consideration lost leave time due to an administrative discharge.

 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 [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 | 2003_Navy | ND03-00758

    Original file (ND03-00758.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-00758 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030326. 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 (Member 1 and 4) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00361

    Original file (ND00-00361.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00361 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000202, 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 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501509

    Original file (ND0501509.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY ex-AR, USN Docket No. The Applicant requests the Discharge 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:Department of Veterans Affairs Statement in Support Claim, dtd September...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01391

    Original file (ND03-01391.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-01391 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030820. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. In the acknowledgement letter, the Applicant was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00755

    Original file (ND03-00755.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-00755 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030326. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :960722: Charges preferred to special court-martial for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) Article 128 (2 specs): (1) Unlawfully strike M_ J_ G_ in the face with his hands and kick her in the back and stomach on...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501132

    Original file (ND0501132.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND05-01132 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20050629. The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The Applicant states that his record of service included good evaluations, awards and decorations, and that he had combat service.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500173

    Original file (ND0500173.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: Letter of Support from O_ W_, Calvary Christian Center, dated October 26, 2004 Applicant’s DD Form 214 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: USNR (DEP) 990629 -...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00873

    Original file (ND03-00873.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-00873 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030424. 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 civilian life subsequent to leaving naval service. The NDRB is authorized, however, to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge to the extent such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00019

    Original file (ND00-00019.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    My discharge was inequitable because the female midshipman involved in the incident, L_ K_, was allowed to remain at the Naval Academy without punishment, although guilty of the same UCMJ violations. 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 that the applicant’s offenses were very serious and overshadowed any...

  • 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.