Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00827
Original file (ND02-00827.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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


ex-FA, USN
Docket No. ND02-00827

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 020522, 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 designate a representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 030214. 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, as submitted

 Listed on DD Form 293 submitted Apr 26, 2002:
1. I have submitted a form once before ya'll were not able to do anything due to the fact I did not send my discharge papers and that ya'll could not find my service records.
Listed on DD Form 293 submitted July 2001:

 1. Dear Board,
It has been almost four years since I was discharged from the Navy due to my behavior. I fel my life is back on track and under control. My behavior was wrong, and I was punished, but now I think my punishment has gone on long enough and I feel that I should be given a second chance and have my discharged upgraded to a General discharge. Please hear and take my pleas into consideration.
Thank You, (Signed by the Applicant)

 Documentation
Applicant submitted a DD Form 293 in July 2001, but did not provide a copy of his DD Form 214 or other documentation. The Applicant's service record did not contain the DD Form 214 or any discharge documents, therefore, the Board closed the case without further action on December 11, 2001. In the re-submission of DD Form 293, the Applicant did provide copies 4 and 1 of his DD Form 214, but his service record does not contain information regarding the discharge action or a copy of the DD Form 214.

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     931027 - 940718  COG
          Active: None

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 940719               Date of Discharge: 980225

 Length of Service (years, months, days):
         Active: 03 07 07
          Inactive: None
Age at Entry: 18                          Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 32
Highest Rate: FN

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):
Performance: NMF*        Behavior: NMF             OTA: NMF

 Military Decorations: None
Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM, OSSR (2)

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: None
* No Marks Found in service record.
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 :

960701:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 134: Drunk.
         Award: Forfeiture of $490.35 per month for 2 months, extra duty for 60 days, reduction to E-2. No indication of appeal in the record.
970227   NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence.
         Award: Correctional Custody for 30 days, reduction to E-2 (suspended for 6 months). No indication of appeal in the record. Correctional custody deferred until 5 Mar 97.
971203:  Emergency Room Nursing Triage Assessment and Care Record: Pt brought in by security when pt's wife called saying pt was going to kill himself. Pt states he was arguing with his wife but denies any suicidal ideations.

971222:  Emergency Medicine Clinic Yokosuka: Pt to emergency room via ambulance found laying on a street bleeding from wrists. Wrists bandaged.
          Assessment/Diagnosis: Attempted suicide, alcohol intoxication, laceration of right wrist.
980105:  Emergency Medicine Clinic Yokosuka: 21 year old male transferred from Japan Hospital after witnessed physical altercation with 2 other men.
Assessment/Diagnosis: 1 - Head laceration , abrasions, 2 - Alcohol intoxication, 3 - High White Blood Cell count.
980109:  Confinement order issued by COMFLEACT, Yokosuka, Japan, to ensure the presence of the accused (Applicant) at the trial. Detained due to alleged violations of UCMJ, Article 92 - Failure to obey an order or regulation, and Article 117 - Provoking speeches or gestures and Article 128 - Assault.
[No information in the service record pertaining to charges being preferred to a court-martial and a request from the Applicant requesting an Other Than Honorable discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial, and subsequent discharge authority.]

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 980225 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’s discharge characterization accurately reflects his service to his country. The discharge was proper and equitable. Normally, to permit relief, an error or inequity must have existed during the period of enlistment in question. No such error or inequity 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. Relief not warranted.

The Applicant 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. 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 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; Article 92, failure to obey a lawful general order; Article 117, provoking speech; Article 128, assault; and Article 134, drunk;
 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 | 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 | 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 | ND03-00033

    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 | ND03-00388

    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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00609

    Original file (ND03-00609.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. In the absence of a discharge package, the Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (C) and, after a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, found that the discharge was proper and equitable (D and E).Issue 1: The Applicant's discharge characterization accurately reflects his service to his...

  • 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 | 2004_Navy | ND04-00505

    Original file (ND04-00505.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions. Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events : 020329: Applicant reenlisted for six years on-board USS HARTFORD.030501: Discharged, DD214 issued reads: UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/IN LIEU OF TRIAL BY COURT MARTIAL, reflecting unauthorized absence totaling 234 days.Applicant’s discharge package not in service recordPART III –...

  • 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 | 2000_Navy | ND00-00557

    Original file (ND00-00557.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00557 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000329, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions. Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :990119: Charges preferred to court-martial for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) Article 86: Unauthorized absence (UA) from 0715, 7Dec98 to 2130, 15Jan99 (39 days/surrendered).pplicant requested an...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01388

    Original file (ND03-01388.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-01388 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 general/ under honorable conditions. The Applicant’s service record provides clear evidence that the discharge authority directed discharge Under Other Than Honorable Conditions.