Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00121
Original file (ND00-00121.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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


ex-AMSAR, USN
Docket No. ND00-00121

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 991102, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to Honorable. 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 000817. 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: GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-140 (formerly 3630600).

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION


Issues

1. My discharge was unfair on the fact of my command did not want to let me out and tried to make my discharge lower than it was but the Admiral gave me general and promised me no reason why it would not turn into honorable based on my circumstances and my unfairness I was receiving.

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)     980516 - 980614  COG
Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 980615               Date of Discharge: 990127

 Length of Service (years, months, days):
         Active: 00 07 12
          Inactive: None
Age at Entry: 19                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 47
Highest Rate: AMSAR

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):
Performance: 0.00 (0)    Behavior: 0.00 (0)                OTA: 0.00

 Military Decorations: None
Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: None

Days of Unauthorized Absence: 11

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

GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-140 (formerly 3630600).

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

981201:  Psychiatric evaluation. Diagnostic Impression: Axis I, No diagnosis. Axis II, Personality disorder NOS with Cluster of personality traits. Axis III, Increased eosinophilic count in CBC. Recommendations: Fit for full duty. Recommend Entry Level Separation for the service member since he has not been in the military for more than 180 days.
 990105:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence 0700, 16Nov98 until 1621/1854, 27Nov98 (11 days/surrendered).
         Award: Restriction and extra duty for 30 days. No indication of appeal in the record. [Extracted from CO's letter dated 22Jan99.]
990106:  Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (Unauthorized absence.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning. [Extracted from CO's letter dated 22Jan99.]

990120:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence from 0645-0810, 11Jan99.
         Award: Restriction and extra duty for 14days. No indication of appeal in the record. [Extracted from CO's letter dated 22Jan99.]
990122:  Commanding officer recommended discharge under Other Than Honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct due to a Pattern of misconduct and Personality disorder. Commanding officer’s comments: AMSAR (applicant is being processed due to a personality disorder and misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. However, the primary grounds for processing is misconduct. AMSAR (applicant) is incapable of adhering to the rules and regulations of this command and the United States Navy, and is simply unwilling to conduct himself in a manner conducive to good order and discipline. AMSAR (applicant) falls within the parameters of reference (a), and administrative discharge is warranted under these circumstances. AMSAR (applicant) was evaluated in the Outpatient Mental Health Clinic, Naval Hospital, Jacksonville, Florida on 28 December 1998 for suicidal ideation. Following the evaluation, it was determined that AMSAR (applicant) suffers from a personality disorder and is impaired for further naval service. The diagnosis was based on AMSAR (applicant) being considered potentially dangerous due to a reported past history of suicidal ideation, difficulty controlling anger, and impulsive behavior. Additionally, the psychiatrist found that while AMSAR (applicant) is not imminently suicidal or homicidal, due to his lifelong pattern of maladaptive responses to routine personal and/or work-related stressors, he may become dangerous to himself or others in the future. Therefore, I recommended AMSAR (applicant) be separated with a characterization of Other Than Honorable.
990126:  Commander, Naval Base, Jacksonville directed the applicant's discharge General (under Honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct due to a Pattern of misconduct.
PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 990127 General (under Honorable conditions) for misconduct due to a Pattern of misconduct (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).
In the applicant’s issue 1, the Board determined this issue is without merit. The applicant claims his command did not want to let him out and tried to make his discharge lower. Also, the Admiral gave him a General and promised him there was no reason why it would not turn into an Honorable, based on the circumstances. The applicant’s Commanding Officer, did recommend an Other Than Honorable discharge for the applicant which was upgraded to General (under Honorable conditions) by Commander, Naval Base Jacksonville. However, the discharge is not automatically upgraded to Honorable, based solely, on the passage of time. The NDRB is authorized to award clemency for post-service factors (what has the applicant done since discharge to become a contributing member of his/her community and to society in general). Those factors include but are not limited to the following: Evidence of continuing educational pursuits (transcripts, diploma, degree or vocational-technical certificates), a verifiable employment history (letter of recommendation from employer), documentation of community service (letter from activity/community group), certificate of non-involvement with civil authorities (police records check) and proof of not using drugs (detoxification certificate). The applicant did not provide any documentation to demonstrate good character and conduct. The applicant is encouraged to begin establishing a reputation of good character and document his accomplishments. Documentation to support any claim of good character is a must to receive any consideration based on post-service achievements . The applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, to discuss his post-service accomplishments, provided an application is received by the NDRB within fifteen years from the date of his discharge. Legal representation at the hearing is advisable. Relief denied.
Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)
A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 18, effective
12 Dec 1997 until Present, Article 1910-140 (formerly 3630600), SEPARATION BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT - PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT.

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 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 | 2001_Navy | ND01-00264

    Original file (ND01-00264.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00264 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010108, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. (Equity Issue) As the documentary evidence of record supports, this former member avers that he had Bipolar Disorder while on active duty and that the symptoms of that psychiatric condition sufficiently mitigated his misconduct of record to warrant discharge under honorable conditions. Award: Forfeiture of $463 per...

  • 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 | ND01-01180

    Original file (ND01-01180.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 (Member 1 ane 4) Fifty-four pages from applicant's service records PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: USNR (DEP) 980311 - 980413 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 980414 Date of Discharge: 990426 Length of Service (years, months,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00440

    Original file (ND04-00440.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND04-00440 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20040121. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Member fully understands decision concerning continued military service versus discharge from Navy rests solely with the parent command and the above discharge plans and recommendations are not binding.971222: Medical Eval: Pt was evaluated as an outpatient by Dr. A_ for the pt’s...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00032

    Original file (ND03-00032.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Appeal denied 000710.000719: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct, misconduct due to commission of a serious offense and misconduct due to civil conviction.000803: Applicant advised of rights and having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to appear before an Administrative Discharge Board. At this time, the applicant has not provided any...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00294

    Original file (ND02-00294.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214. 000821: Commanding Officer recommended discharge general under honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense. 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).Issue 1:...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00612

    Original file (ND02-00612.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Patient (Applicant) s/p SARD for alcohol dependence. Recommendation: Continue AA meetings, weekly follow-up with medical officer, attend Stress Management weekly.000326: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge general (under honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct, commission of a serious offense and alcohol abuse rehabilitation failure. 000326: Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-01221

    Original file (ND02-01221.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-01221 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 20020828, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant's DD Form 214 Nineteen pages from Applicant's service record PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00832

    Original file (ND01-00832.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. 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) 970324 - 970819 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 970820 Date of Discharge: 000929 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active:...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00613

    Original file (ND01-00613.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 Letter from applicant's parents Letter from applicant's mother Letter from applicant to parents Letter from doctor dated September 21, 2000 Forty-one pages from medical records Letter from commanding officer to applicant's parents dated April 24, 2000 Letter from psychologist, undated Comments from the American Legion dated September 21, 2001...