Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600883
Original file (ND0600883.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-FR, USN
Docket No. ND06-00883

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20060621 . The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to uncharacterized. 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 20070405 . After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case the Board determined that clemency was not warranted and that the characterization of discharge was appropriate. The Board’s vote was unanimous that the character of the discharge shall not change. The discharge shall remain as a bad conduct discharge by reason of court-martial conviction.



PART I - ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Applicant Issues
The Applicant is requesting a discharge characterization upgrade to uncharacterized .

The Applicant is requesting a RE-code change so that he can join the National Guard.
Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Applicant’s DD Form 214 (Member 4)
Applicant’s DD Form 214 (State Director of Veterans Affair 6)
 Excerpts from Service Record (2 pgs)
Letter from Applicant’s Wife , not dated
Reference Letter from SGT A_ , not dated
Certificate of Baptism, dtd March 28, 2004
Certificate of Marriage, dtd October 17, 2005

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     20000526 – 20010611       COG
          Active: None

Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 20010612              Date of Discharge: 20031022

Length of Service (years, months, days):

          Active: 0 2 0 3 3 0 (Does not exclude lost time.)
         Inactive: None

 Time Lost During This Period (days):
         Unauthorized absence: 385 day s
         Confinement:              51 day s

Age at Entry: 18

Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 12                                 AFQT: 32

Highest Rate: FA

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: NA*                           Behavior: NA*             OTA: NA*
Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, (as listed on the DD Form 214): None

 * Not Available


Character, Narrative Reason, and Authority of Discharge (at time of issuance):
BAD CONDUCT/COURT MARTIAL, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 5815-010 (formerly 3640420).
Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

010827:  Applicant to Unauthorized absence

011015:  Applicant from Unauthorized absence (total of 49 days u/a)

011017:  Applicant to Unauthorized absence

020125:  Applicant from Unauthorized absence (total of 100 days u/a)

020212:  Applicant to Unauthorized absence

021006:  Applicant from Unauthorized absence (total of 236 days u/a)

 021006:  To confinement.

 0 2112 6 :  Special Court Martial [trial dates 021120 & 0 21126 ]
          Charge I: violation of the UCMJ, Article 85 , ( 2 specifications). Plea: Not Guilty, but Guilty to the lesser-included offense of Article 86. Finding: Guilty to Article 86 (the greater offense of Article 85 was withdrawn prior to findings).
         Specification 1: On or about 020212, absented himself from RTC, Great Lakes, Illinois, and remained so absent in desertion until apprehended on or about 021006 ( 236 days/A.) . Plea : Not G uilty , but found Guilty to the lesser-included offense of unauthorized absence . Findings : Guilty to unauthorized absence (the specification was modified to remove the words, “and with intent to remain away therefrom permanently,” and “in desertion” prior to findings) .
         Specification 2: On or about 011017, absented himself from RTC, Great Lakes, Illinois, and remained so absent in desertion until apprehended on or about 020125 ( 1 00 days/A.). Plea : Not Guilty. Findings : Guilty to unauthorized absence.
         Charge II: violation of UMCJ, Article 86 .
          Specification: On or about 010827, absented himself from RTC, Great Lakes, Illinois, and remained so absent until on or about 011015 (49 days/S) . Plea : Guilty. Findings : Guilty .
          Sentence: Confinement for 51 days , reduction to E-1, Bad Conduct discharge.
         CA 030206 : T he sentence approved and , except for that portion of the sentence extending to a bad conduct discharge , will be executed
0 21126 :  From confinement, restored to full duty.

030724 :  NMCCCA: The findings of guilty and sentence, as approved on review
         are affirmed.
031016 :  Appellate review complete.
0 31020 :  SSPCMO: Article 71c, UCMJ, having been complied with, Bad Conduct discharge ordered executed.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion
The Applicant was discharged on 20031022 with a bad conduct discharge which was the sentence adjudged by a properly convened special court-martial. That sentence was subsequently approved by both the convening and appellate review authorities (A and (B). After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the Applicant’s issues were insufficient to merit clemency (C).

The Applicant is requesting and discharge characterization upgrade to uncharacterized based on board clemency. In response to the Applicant’s issue, relevant and material facts stated in a court-martial specification are presumed by the NDRB to be established facts. With respect to a discharge adjudged by a court-martial case, the action of the NDRB is restricted to upgrades based on clemency. Clemency is an act of leniency that reduces the severity of the punishment imposed. After a thorough review of the Applicant’s record, issues submitted, and post service accomplishments, the Board determined that clemency was not warranted and that the sentence awarded the Applicant at his court-martial was appropriate for the offenses he committed. Relief denied.

The Applicant is requesting a RE-code change so that he can join the National Guard. Since the NDRB has no jurisdiction over reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Navy, Marine Corps, or any other of the Armed Forces, NDRB is not authorized to change a reenlistment code. An unfavorable “RE” code is, in itself, not a bar to reenlistment. A request for a waiver can be submitted during the processing of a formal application for reenlistment through a recruiter. Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) can make changes to reenlistment codes. Relief is not authorized.
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. The Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), re-issued October 2002, effective 22 Aug 2002 until 8 Sep 2004, Article 5815-010 (formerly 3640420), Executing a Dishonorable or Bad Conduct Discharge.

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 II, Para 205(2), Jurisdictional Limitations Authority for Review of Discharges.
D. 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 | 2009_Navy | ND0900023

    Original file (ND0900023.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues1. .Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, and basis for discharge, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reason for separation shall remain .ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant Complaint Procedures : If you believe the decision in your case...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00673

    Original file (ND02-00673.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    SR D_ T_ presented a written statement, which I reviewed while in legal, which told of how she had overheard these girls talking about how they were going to "get me" and other things, but her statement was not even taken into account, nor was she present at the mast in front of LCDR C_. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600284

    Original file (ND0600284.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged on 19941021 with a bad conduct discharge which was the sentence adjudged by a properly convened special court-martial. In response to the Applicant’s issues, with respect to a discharge adjudged by a court-martial case, the action of the NDRB is restricted to...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501248

    Original file (ND0501248.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I was in the Navy less then 180 days. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant’s DD Form 214 Ltr from Applicant, dtd July 05, 2005 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR 20010421 – 20010523 COG Active: None Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 20010524 Date of Discharge: 20011030 Length of Service (years,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600429

    Original file (ND0600429.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION Issues, as stated Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application: “ Respectfully request change of bad conduct discharge into an honorable discharge, also please change my separation code:jjd/901 and re-entry code of re4. 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 violations of the UCMJ, Articles 86 (Unauthorized...

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600504

    Original file (MD0600504.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. D. 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. You may view DoD Instruction 1332.28 and other Decisional Documents by going online at “...

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600250

    Original file (MD0600250.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION Issues, as stated The Applicant and his Representative submitted the following issue, which supersedes all prior issues submitted to the Board:“I request my Bad Conduct Discharge be upgraded to a General Discharge due to equitable...

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600781

    Original file (MD0600781.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board determined that clemency was not warranted and that the characterization of discharge was appropriate. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant’s DD Form 214 (State Director of Veterans Affair-6) Applicant’s DD Form 214 (Member 4) Applicant’s DD Form 214 (Member 1) PART II -...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600792

    Original file (ND0600792.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Decisional Issues None Documentation In addition to the service and medical records, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant’s DD Form 214 (Service 2) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 19911106 – 19920824 COGActive: None Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 19920825 Date of Discharge: 19951128 Length of Service (years, months, days):03 03 04(Does...

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600420

    Original file (MD0600420.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD06-00420 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20060111. The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable.The Applicant requests a personal appearance hearing before the Board in the Washington National Capital Region and a documentary record discharge review. This is not the truth.After that I began to get constant threats from staff Sgt.