Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00568
Original file (ND01-00568.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-SA, USNR
Docket No. ND01-00568

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 010327, 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 020307. 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

 See attached letters.

 Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
Statement from applicant dated March 3, 2000
Statement from applicant dated March 24, 2001

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: None
         Inactive: None

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 911122               Date of Discharge: 960307

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 03 06 07         Does not exclude lost time
         Inactive: 00 07 08

 Age at Entry: 18                          Years Contracted: 8

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 38

 Highest Rate: SA

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.80 (1)    Behavior: 3.80 (1)                OTA: 3.80

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM, NER, SSDR

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: 617

 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 :

930211:  Applicant declared a deserter.

 930227:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence from 0730, 8Jan93 to 1843, 7Feb93 (30 days/surrendered), violation of UCMJ, Article 87: Miss movement on 25Jan93.
         Award: Forfeiture of $400 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to SR. No indication of appeal in the record.
940609:  Applicant declared a deserter.

940510:  Applicant to unauthorized absence 1930, 10May94.

951222:  Applicant returned to military control 1225, 22Dec95 (587 days/apprehended).

960307:  DD Form 214: Applicant discharged under other than honorable conditions/in lieu of trial by court martial, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630650.

Applicant's separation package missing from service record.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 960307 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).

Issue 1. The NDRB has no authority to change reenlistment codes or make recommendations to permit reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Naval Service or any other branch of the Armed Forces. Additionally, a less than fully honorable discharge and/or an unfavorable “RE” code is not, in itself, a bar to reenlistment. A request for waiver can be requested during the processing of a formal application for enlistment through a recruiter. Relief is therefore denied.

The Board will not grant relief to allow a former service member the opportunity to obtain better employment. The applicant’s discharge was proper and equitable and accurately reflects his service to his country. Normally, to permit relief, an error or injustice must have existed during the period of enlistment in question. No such error or injustice occurred during the applicant’s enlistment. Additionally, 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 the service. However, the NDRB is authorized to consider outstanding post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge, 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. 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. Evidence of continuing educational pursuits, an employment record, documentation of community service, certification of non-involvement with civil authorities and proof of his not using drugs, are examples of verifiable documents that should have been provided to receive consideration for relief, based on post-service conduct. The applicant did not provide sufficient documentation to warrant an upgrade to his discharge. He is reminded that he remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of his discharge. The applicant can provide additional documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments at that time. Legal representation at a personal appearance hearing is highly recommended but not required. Relief denied.

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 [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 “ afls10.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 | ND00-00269

    Original file (ND00-00269.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. 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...

  • 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 | 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 | ND02-01010

    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...

  • 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 | 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 | 2001_Navy | ND01-00787

    Original file (ND01-00787.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00787 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010521, 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, NDRB discerned no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the applicant’s service. 900511: Charges preferred to special court-martial for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ)...

  • 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 | 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 | 2004_Navy | ND04-01132

    Original file (ND04-01132.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND04-01132 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20040707. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. 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...