Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00177
Original file (ND99-00177.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-SN, USN
Docket No. ND99-00177

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 981116, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The applicant requested a personal appearance hearing discharge review. The applicant did not list any representative on the DD Form 293. In the acknowledgement letter to the applicant, he was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 991004. 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/MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

The NDRB did note an administrative error on the original DD Form 214. Block 12a, Dated Entered AD This Period should read: “93 JUL 18” vice “92 OCT 24”, Block 12c, Net Active Service This Period should read: "02 08 08" vice "03 05 04". The original DD Form 214 should be corrected or reissued as appropriate.








PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

 1. I, (applicant) respectfully request the upgrade of my current discharge to Honorable. I feel that since my discharge, I have matured into a model citizen. I am currently a member of a local church (Southside Baptist Church). I am also married and a father of one.
The reason for this request is for educational purposes. I feel that be bettering myself through education I can be a more productive citizen.

 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):
         Active: None
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     921024 - 930718  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 930719               Date of Discharge: 960325

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 02 08 07
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 19                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 34

 Highest Rate: SN

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.70 (2)    Behavior: 3.80 (2)                OTA: 3.60       4.0 evals
 Performance: 2.00 (1)    Behavior: 1.00 (1)                OTA: 1.67       5.0 eval

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM

Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

960106:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 128: Assault on 95Dec07.
         Award: Forfeiture of $478 per month for 1 month, restriction and extra duty for 25 days, reduction to SA. Reduction suspended for 6 months. No indication of appeal in the record.
960129   Medical Officer evaluation: Diagnoses: Axis I: Alcohol abuse r/o alcohol dependence, Axis II: Personality disorder with narcisistic and paranoid features severe - EPTE (principal diagnosis). Recommended expeditious administrative separation.

960208:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense as evidenced by your punishment under the UCMJ and convenience of the Government on the basis of your personality disorder.
960208:          Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights except the right to obtain copies of the documents used to support the basis for the separation.
960208:  Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense and convenience of the government on the basis of personality disorder.

960318:  BUPERS directed the applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 960325 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (A). The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (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 (C and D).

The applicant introduced no decisional issues for consideration by the Board.

The NDRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an applicant's discharge, will change the reason for discharge if such a change is warranted. A desire for educational benefits is insufficient reason to upgrade a discharge. Further, there is no law or regulation that provides that an unfavorable discharge maybe upgraded based solely on the passage of time, or good conduct in the civilian life subsequent to leaving the service. To permit relief, an error or injustice must have existed during the period of enlistment in question.

The applicant is reminded that he is eligible for a personal appearance hearing provided the application is received within 15 years from the date of discharge


Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

 A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 9, effective
22 Jul 94 until 02 Oct 96, Article 3630600, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT – COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE.

B. 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.

C. 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.

D. 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 obtain a copy of DoD Directive 1332.28 by writing to:
                  DA Military Review Boards Agency
                  Management Information and Support Directorate
                  Armed Forces Reading Room
                  Washington, D.C. 20310-1809

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
                  Washington Navy Yard
                  720 Kennon Street SE Rm 309
                  Washington, D.C. 20374-5023     

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00718

    Original file (ND99-00718.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 980206 general (under honorable conditions) for misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct (A). The applicant You should read Enclosure (5) of the Directive before submitting such a complaint.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00527

    Original file (ND01-00527.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-DCFA, USN Docket No. ND01-00527 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010315, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable and his re-enlistment code upgraded from an Re-Code-4 to a re-enlistment codes so he may re-enlist. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-01082

    Original file (ND00-01082.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION 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, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: USNR (DEP) 940207 - 940315 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 940316 Date of Discharge: 961028 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 02 07...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00135

    Original file (ND01-00135.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00135 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 001113, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to Honorable. Review of medical records indicates request for final psychiatric evaluation and disposition with Axis I: adjustment disorder with repressed mood and R/O paranoid personality disorder. The applicant did not provide any of these documents.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00250

    Original file (ND01-00250.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION Psychologically unfit for continued military service.930622: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under Other Than Honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the Commission of a serious offense and Convenience of the government due to personality disorder.930623: Applicant advised of his rights and having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ, Article 27B, elected to appear before an Administrative Discharge...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00435

    Original file (ND99-00435.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The discharge shall remain: UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/Misconduct – commission of a serious offense, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600. Based on the strength of his desire not to remain in the Navy and the strong potential for future problems with this individual, it is this commanding officer's recommendation that SR (applicant) be separated from the Navy by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense and that the characterization of the discharge be...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00160

    Original file (ND99-00160.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    951213: Special Court Martial Charge I: violation of UCMJ, Article 85: Deserter, (1) Specification: Desertion from 950724-951112(111days/A). 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 introduced no decisional issues for consideration by the Board. You may obtain a copy of DoD Directive 1332.28 by writing to: DA Military Review Boards...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00065

    Original file (ND99-00065.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board will not grant relief on the basis of these issues.The applicant is reminded that the Board is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge (D). At this time, the applicant has not provided any documentation of good character and conduct. You should read Enclosure (5) of the Directive before submitting such a complaint.

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00974

    Original file (ND99-00974.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND99-00974 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 990713, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-01232

    Original file (ND99-01232.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Decision A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 000713. 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 introduced no decisional issues for consideration by the Board. 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...