Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00317
Original file (ND02-00317.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-BTFN, USN
Docket No. ND02-00317

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 020129, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable or 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 021121. 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, as submitted

 1. The reason I left was because I just got a new car and the two guys that I was with talked me in to leaving. I'm sorry that I listened to them. 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):
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     920617 - 920726  COG
         Active: None

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 920727               Date of Discharge: 940826

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 02 01 00         Does not exclude lost time
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 20                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 32

 Highest Rate: BTFN

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.07 (3)    Behavior: 3.13 (3)                OTA: 3.27

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM, BER

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: 78

 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 3630650.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

940516:  Applicant to unauthorized absence 0730, 940516.

940516:  Applicant missed ship's movement.

940615:  Applicant declared a deserter.

940802:  Applicant from unauthorized absence 1035, 940802 (78 days/apprehended).

940826:  DD Form 214: Applicant discharged under other than honorable conditions in lieu of a trial by court-martial, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630650.

Note: The Applicant’s separation package is missing from the service record. The
NDRB requested the Applicant provide pertinent documentation to the Board for
review, if available. The NDRB received no response from Applicant to this request.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 940826 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 was apprehended after an unauthorized absence in excess of 30 days, a violation of the UCMJ tribal by court-martial. The Applicant accepted an under other than honorable discharge in lieu of standing trial. Although the Applicant is sorry for his misconduct, 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. The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, reflects his disregard for the orders and directives that regulate good order and discipline in the naval service. The discharge was proper and equitable. Relief denied.

Issue 2: 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. Therefore, relief is denied.

 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 up-graded based solely on the passage of time, or good conduct in civilian life subsequent to leaving the service.

The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of discharge. The Applicant can provide additional documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments at that time. Representation at a personal appearance hearing is recommended but not required.


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 “ 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 | ND99-00154

    Original file (ND99-00154.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Please consider my medical problems in reviewing my discharge. Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events : 931115: Applicant to unauthorized absence 0730, 15Nov93.931115: Applicant from unauthorized absence 0830, 15Nov93 (1 day, 1 hour/surrendered).940509: Applicant reported for treatment to Naval Hospital, Portsmouth, VA. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00578

    Original file (ND99-00578.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND99-00578 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 990412, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. Decision A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 000121. The discharge shall remain: UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/IN LIEU OF TRIAL BY COURT MARTIAL, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630650.The NDRB did note an administrative error on the original DD Form 214.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00436

    Original file (ND00-00436.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00436 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000222, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions. The applicant stated he was completely satisfied with the counsel he had received. 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’s...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00521

    Original file (ND03-00521.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-00521 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030211. 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 from Applicant, undated Applicant’s DD Form 214 One page from Applicant’s service record PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00503

    Original file (ND03-00503.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. [Extracted from DD Form 214].NO DISCHARGE PACKAGE AVAILABLE PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged on 20020719 under other than honorable conditions in lieu of a trial by court-martial (A and B).

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00182

    Original file (ND02-00182.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00182 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 011218, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The NDRB requested the Applicant provide pertinent documentation to the Board for review, if available. There is no evidence in the official record, nor did the Applicant provide any certifiable documentation that there was any impropriety during her enlistment concerning a lack of Command support, nor is there any...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-01218

    Original file (ND99-01218.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND99-01218 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 990914, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. 961112: 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. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00397

    Original file (ND03-00397.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-00397 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030107. The Applicant requests that the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00179

    Original file (ND00-00179.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    These documents were not attached to his application and the NDRB did correspond with applicant and requested he provide these documents. Applicant's request for discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial not contained in service record. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 850301 under other than honorable conditions in lieu of a trial by court-martial (A and B).

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00008

    Original file (ND01-00008.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 970109 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 discharge was proper and equitable (D and E).The applicant’s issue states: “I would like a chance to receive school benefits and a change in service record.” There...