Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600492
Original file (ND0600492.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB)
 DISCHARGE REVIEW
DECISIONAL DOCUMENT
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

ex-MA3, USN
Docket No. ND06-00492

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20060213 . The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions) . The Applicant requests 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 20061206 . After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the Applicant’s service was discovered by the NDRB. The Board’s vote was unanimous that the character ization of the discharge shall not change. The discharge shall remain Under Other Than Honorable Conditions by reason of misconduct due to commission of serious offense - absent without leave - 30 days or more .
The NDRB did note administrative error(s) on the original DD Form 214. Block 12a, Date Entered AD This Period, should read: “02 02 25 ; ” and 12c, Net Active Service This Period, should read “02 05 16. ” The Commander, Navy Personnel Command, Millington, TN, will be notified, recommending the DD Form 214 be corrected or reissued, as appropriate.




PART I - ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION


Decisional Issues:

Equity : Personal Problems
Equity: Good service overall

Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Letter from Applicant, dtd January 3, 2006
 Applicant’s DD Form 214 (Service 7)
Letter from J_ W_, Jail Administrator, dtd December 29, 2005

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     20020117 - 20020 224       COG
          Active: None

Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 20020 225              Date of Discharge: 20040813

Length of Service (years, months, days):

          Active: 0 2 0 5 16 (Does not exclude lost time.)
         Inactive: None

 Time Lost During This Period (days):
         Unauthorized absence: 108 day s
         Confinement:              None

Age at Entry: 1 9

Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 12                                 AFQT: 57

Highest Rate: MA3

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3 . 3 ( 3 )              Behavior: 2 .0 ( 3 )                 OTA: 3 .0 7

Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, (as listed on the DD Form 214): National Defense Service Medal, Sea Service Deployment Ribbon , Expert Pi s tol Shot Medal, Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal


Character, Narrative Reason, and Authority of Discharge (at time of issuance):

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-142 .

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

040308 :  Applicant to unauthorized absence at 0 730 on 040308 .
040624 :  Applicant from unauthorized absence at 2100 on 0 40624 ( 108 days/surrendered).
040813:  DD Form 214: Applicant discharged under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense absent without leave 30 days or more, authority: MILPERSMAN 1910-142.

Service Record did not contain the Administrative Discharge package.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion
The Applicant was discharged on 20040813 by reason of misconduct due to commission of serious offense - absent without leave - 30 days or more (A and B) with a service characterization of under other than 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 (C and D). The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (E ).
The Applicant contends her disciplinary problems were the result of stress caused by a family situation (her pregnancy and fear of impending overseas assignment to remote duty station without family support). The NDRB recognizes that serving in the U.S. Navy is challenging. Our country is fortunate to have men and women willing to endure the hardships and sacrifices required in order to serve their country. It must be noted that most members of the Navy serve honorably and therefore earn their honorable discharges. In fairness to those members of the Navy, who serve honorably, commanders and separation authorities are tasked to ensure that undeserving Sailors receive no higher characterization than is due. The NDRB found that the Applicant's service was equitably characterized. Relief denied.

When the service of a member of the U.S. Navy has been honest and faithful, it is appropriate to characterize that service as honorable. An under other than honorable conditions discharge is warranted when significant negative aspects of a member’s conduct or performance of duty outweigh the positive aspects of the member’s military record. The Applicant’s service was marred by an unauthorized absence of 108 days, a violation of UCMJ Article 86. An authorized absence for more than 30 days is considered a serious offense for which a punitive discharge is authorized at courts martial. The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of her service, reflects her willful failure to meet the requirements of her contract with the U.S. Navy and falls far short of that required for an upgrade of her characterization of service. Relief is not warranted.

The Applicant desires an upgrade to enhance her employment opportunities. The Veterans Administration determines eligibility for post-service benefits, not the Naval Discharge Review Board. The Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational opportunities. Regulations limit the Board’s review to a determination of the propriety and equity of the discharge.

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 documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments or any additional evidence related to this 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), re-issued October 2002, effective 22 Aug 02 unt il 25 April 05 Article 1910-142 . SEPARATION BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT - COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE.

B. The Manual for Courts-Martial authorizes the award of a punitive discharge if adjudged as part of the sentence upon conviction by a special or general court-martial for violation of the UCMJ, Article 86 (unauthorized absence for more than 30 days) .

C. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part V, Para 502, Propriety .

 D. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part V, Para 503, Equity .

 E. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part II, Para 211, Regularity of Government Affairs .

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 Instruction 1332.28, you may submit a complaint in accordance with Enclosure (5) of that Instruction . You should read Enclosure (5) of the Instruction 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 Instruction 1332.28 and other Decisional Documents by going online at “ http://Boards.law.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:

                  Secretary of the Navy Council of Review Boards
                   Attn: Naval Discharge Review Board
                   720 Kennon Street SE Rm 309
                  Washington Navy Yard DC 20374-5023

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-01299

    Original file (ND04-01299.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to entry level separation and the reason for the discharge be changed to “mislead by recruiter.” The Applicant requests a personal appearance discharge review before a traveling panel closest to Houston or Galveston, TX. The NDRB also advised that the board first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing. The summary of service clearly documents that commission...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600034

    Original file (ND0600034.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Character, Narrative Reason, and Authority of Discharge (at time of issuance):GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS) MISCONDUCT, authority: MILPERSMAN, Article 1910-142 (formerly 3630605). 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 implies that his discharge was improper because he was denied Captain’s Mast. The summary of service clearly...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00278

    Original file (ND02-00278.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant's DD Form 214 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: None Active: None Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 941108 Date of Discharge: 990404 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 04 04 27 Inactive: None Unknown: An Administrative Discharge Board, based upon a...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600304

    Original file (ND0600304.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged, in absentia, on 20050413 by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (A and B) with a service characterization of under other than honorable conditions. The names, and votes of the members of the Board are recorded on...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600537

    Original file (ND0600537.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). ]001227: DD Form 214: Applicant discharged under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense - absence without leave - 30 days or more, authority: MILPERSMAN 1910-142.Service Record did not contain the Administrative Discharge package. The names, and votes of the members of the Board are...

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0501267

    Original file (MD0501267.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). The evaluating Psychologist recommends administrative separation due to alcohol abuse rehabilitation failure.031217: Restriction and extra duty awarded at NJP on 031003 vacated.040219: Substance Abuse Rehabilitation Program, Naval Hospital, Camp Lejeune: Applicant refused treatment for substance abuse and was counseled regarding treatment...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700468

    Original file (ND0700468.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Despite a servicemember’s prior record of service certain serious offenses warrant separation from the naval service in order to maintain proper order and discipline. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years from the date of discharge. Board Membership: The names and votes of the members of the Board are recorded on the original of this document and...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600481

    Original file (ND0600481.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. 050105: The Applicant was discharged. 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:Secretary of the Navy Council of Review Boards

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500167

    Original file (ND0500167.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant’s DD Form 214 Copy of Commander’s Navy Region Hawaii, Discharge Authority PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500191

    Original file (ND0500191.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Said statements are now of record for the Board’s review. The Board will determine which reason for discharge should have been assigned based upon the facts and circumstances before the Board, including the service regulations governing the reasons for discharge at that time, to determine whether relief is warranted. 407, part 3.As the representative, we ask that consideration be given to equitable relief, as this is a matter that involves a determination whether a discharge should be...