Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00955
Original file (ND01-00955.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-AMSAA, USN
Docket No. ND01-00955

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 010723, 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. Subsequent to the application, the applicant obtained representation by the American Legion.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 020419. 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
1. (Equity Issue) This former member avers that his discharge is to harsh because his mother’s illness mitigated his misconduct. He opines that upgrade of his characterization of service to full honorable is warranted.

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 this application.
Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
Copy of DD Form 214
Statement from applicant
Letter to applicant from Malteser Hospital
Translated letter from Malteser Hospital dated January 10, 2000
Letter from Defense Department dated September 18, 2000
Copy of charge sheet dated September 12, 2000
Copy of NAVPERS 2070/606 Record of unauthorized absence

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: None
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     990528 - 990613  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 990614               Date of Discharge: 001004

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 01 03 21
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 34                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 79

 Highest Rate: AMSAA

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: NMF                  Behavior: NMF             OTA: NMF

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: None

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: 211

 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 :

000912:  Charges preferred to special court-martial for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) Article 86:
         Unauthorized absence (UA) from 0800, 11Jan00 to 1330, 9Aug00 (211 days/surrendered). [Extracted from documents submitted by applicant.]

000918:  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.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 001004 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 applicant failed to convince the Board that desertion from the Navy was necessary for his mother’s well-being. While he may feel that his mother’s illness was a factor that contributed to his actions, 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.

Issue 2. The applicant’s discharge characterization accurately reflects his service to his country. The discharge was proper and equitable. Normally, to permit relief, an error or injustice must have existed during the period of enlistment in question. No such error or injustice is evident 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 29, effective
11 Jul 2000 until Present, 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 “ 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 | ND00-00935

    Original file (ND00-00935.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00935 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000724, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions or entry level separation or uncharacterized. Age at Entry: 19 Years Contracted: 4 Education Level: 12 AFQT: Unknown Highest Rate: SR Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks): Performance: NMF Behavior: NMF OTA: NMF Military Decorations: None...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00544

    Original file (ND03-00544.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-00544 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030213. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review.

  • 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 | 2003_Navy | ND03-00012

    Original file (ND03-00012.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-00012 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 20021001, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The NDRB also advised that the board first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing. 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.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-01190

    Original file (ND01-01190.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-01190 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010920, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable and the reason for the discharge be changed to Hardship-RE-3. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 991216 under other than honorable conditions in lieu of a trial by court-martial (A). PART IV - INFORMATION FOR THE APPLICANT If you believe that the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00336

    Original file (ND04-00336.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review. E. 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. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00600

    Original file (ND01-00600.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. No indication of appeal in the record.990804: DD Form 214: Discharged under other than honorable conditions/in lieu of trial by court martial, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-106.Separation 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 (C and D).The applicant...

  • 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 | 2001_Navy | ND01-00109

    Original file (ND01-00109.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00109 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 001031, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. My letter of explanation is attached.” Concerning a change in reenlistment code, the NDRB has no authority to change reenlistment codes or make recommendations to permit reentry into the naval service or any other of the Armed Forces.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00388

    Original file (ND03-00388.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. ]000727: DD Form 214: Applicant discharged under other than honorable conditions in lieu of trial by court-martial, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-106.Separation package missing from service record. 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...