Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00252
Original file (ND00-00252.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-RMSA, USN
Docket No. ND00-00252

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 991214, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. The applicant listed Civilian Counsel as his representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 000928. 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 1910 - 142 (formerly 3630605).

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues (verbatim)

 1. My discharge was inequitable because it was based on an incident of misconduct with extenuating emotional mitigating factors.

In August 1998, 1 was serving as a Radioman & Surface Rescue Swimmer in what was my second deployment in the Persian Gulf on the USS Ingraham. Our assigned mission was to maintain a military presence in the Gulf as a result of the ongoing crisis with Iraq. It was at this time that I was informed that my mother had a relapse of metastatic breast cancer that we thought had been cured approximately one year before. I was advised that her condition was very serious.

My emotionally charged state of mind, immaturity of age (20) and daily stress of deployment, was the spark that caused me to have a lapse of discipline with my E-6 over something as innocuous as the proper undershirt for my uniform. I did not request, nor was I offered an opportunity to confer with a Judge Advocate, nor did I attempt to appeal the Non-Judicial Punishment that was imposed. I was suffering from tunnel vision and simply accepted an administrative discharge, as it appeared to be the fastest way to return home to see my mother. Even though I failed to consider the consequences of my actions at that time, I do not believe today that the consequences of being dogged by an Other Than Honorable Discharge for the rest of my life are equitable in lieu of the circumstances presented.

Thank you for your consideration in this matter.

Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
Copy of Evaluation Report & Counseling Record (4pgs)
Copy of Letter from Mother's Doctor
Copy of Commanding Officer's Commendation
Copy of Certificate of Completion for Surface Rescue Swimmer Training
Copy of Surface Rescue Swimmer Evaluation Report (2pgs)
Copy of Shellback Entry dated 970710
Copy of DD Form 214 (2)
Letter from Attorney at Law L.L. M T_____ (2).

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: USN               None
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     None

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 951004               Date of Discharge: 981022

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 03 00 19
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 17                          Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 79

 Highest Rate: RMSN

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.00 (1)    Behavior: 3.00 (1)                OTA: 3 .08

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: Navy Rifle Marksmanship Ribbon, SSDR, AFEM

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 1910-142 (formerly 3630605).

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

970223:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 134: (2 Specs), Spec 1: Wrongful alter his Military ID Card with intent to defraud or deceive, Spec 2: Wrongfully use his Military ID Card purporting to be over the age of 21.
         Award: Forfeiture of $300.00 per month for 1 month, restriction and extra duty for 30 days. No indication of appeal in the record.
970429:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 91: Disrespectful in language and deportment toward ET1 A______ by throwing cups and utensils after being told to wash them by hand; violation of UCMJ Article 92: Failure to obey a lawful order to field day until 1930 hrs on 970415.
         Award: Forfeiture of $300.00 per month for 1 month, restriction and extra duty on the ship for 30 days. No indication of appeal in the record.

980130:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 116: Riot or breach of peace, violation of UCMJ Article 128: Assault, violation of UCMJ Article 134.
         Award: Correctional Custody for 30 days, forfeiture of $463.05 per month for 2 months, reduction to E-1. No indication of appeal in the record [Extracted from case file].

980901:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 91: Contempt or disrespect to a superior Petty Officer, violation of UCMJ Article 92: failure to obey a lawful order.
         Award: Restriction and extra duty for 14 days. No indication of appeal in the record [Extracted from case file].
980903:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct pattern of misconduct and commission of a serious offense [Extracted from case file].
980903:          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 [Extracted from case file].
980913:  Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct pattern of misconduct and commission of a serious offense. Commanding officer’s comments (verbatim): RMSA___(applicant) has shown his inability to conform to working in the Navy. He was given a clean slate when he arrived to JARRETT but he continued his misconduct. While serving in JARRETT he has shown disregard for ship and crew by threatening the safety of JARRETT’s security, in order to be separated from the Navy. For this I removed his security access, and have recommended to DONCAF to have his clearance revoked. RMSA____(applicant) has been given his chance to reform himself at two different commands and he has failed both times. He has shown a great interest in separation from the Navy, by his actions and deeds he deserves an Other Than Honorable discharge. [Extracted from case file]

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT
REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 981022 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (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).

In issue 1, the applicant states that his “discharge was inequitable because it was based on an incident of misconduct with extenuating emotional mitigating factors” concerning his mother’s health while he was on deployment. However, before the applicant’s September 1998 non-judicial punishment, the Board found the applicant received non-judicial punishment on three other occasions beginning February 1997 through January 1998. The applicant seems to show a propensity for causing trouble. The Board also found that the applicant's age, education level, and test scores qualified him for enlistment. While he may feel that his immaturity was a factor that contributed to his actions, the record clearly reflects his willful disregard for the requirements of military discipline and demonstrated that he was unfit for further service. The record is devoid of evidence that the applicant was not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions. Relief denied.

 Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

 A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 18, effective
12 Dec 97 until 29 March 2000, Article 1910-142 [formerly 3630605]. SEPARATION BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT- COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE .

B. In Appendix 12 of the Manual for Courts-Martial, a punitive discharge is authorized for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Article 92, for failure to obey a lawful order, if adjudged at a Special or General Court 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 | 2001_Navy | ND01-00079

    Original file (ND01-00079.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00079 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 001020, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of Drug/Alcohol Abuse Rehabilitation Program Acceptance Letter Copy of DD Form 214 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00216

    Original file (ND00-00216.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 (2 copies) Copy of undergraduate transcripts Graduate school (Doctoral program in Clinical Psychology) transcripts Current Vitae Certificate of Appointment by Commanding Officer, RTC, San Diego to E-1 for completing Recruit Training in top10% (2 copies) Letter of Commendation from Commanding Officer, RTC, San Diego, for attaining highest...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00434

    Original file (ND03-00434.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    My decision to refuse the anthrax vaccine was not one that I took lightly. 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 issues raised regarding the legality and safety of the Department of Defenses’ (DOD) Anthrax Vaccination program are beyond the purview of the NDRB to address. As this time, the Applicant has not provided any documentation for the Board...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-01194

    Original file (ND01-01194.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-01194 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010920, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. The applicant described the circumstances surrounding discharge and requested a change based on his post service conduct. However, the NDRB is authorized to consider outstanding post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge, to the extent that such matters provide a basis for a...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00826

    Original file (ND00-00826.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of Record of Military Processing Form (2pgs) Copy of High School Record Copy of Evaluation Report & Counseling Record Letters from Attorney at Law (3) Copy of DD From 214 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: USN None Inactive: USNR (DEP) 980031 - 980408 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00151

    Original file (ND00-00151.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 980824 under Other Than Honorable conditions for misconduct due to Commission of a serious offense (A and B). The applicant was not identified as a drug abuser, while serving in the Navy, therefore, the Navy is not responsible for providing rehabilitation treatment. PART IV - INFORMATION FOR THE APPLICANT If you believe that the decision in your case is unclear, not responsive to the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00684

    Original file (ND00-00684.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00684 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000508, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. The discharge shall remain: UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910 - 142 (formerly 3630605). Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00211

    Original file (ND04-00211.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. ]990528: Commanding Officer recommended discharge general (under honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense. The Applicant contends that his ability to serve in the Navy can be attributed to his “youth,” “marital and family and child care programs,” and “personal problems.” While he may feel that his personal problems and immaturity...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00028

    Original file (ND01-00028.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    It is, therefore, recommended that Seaman Apprentice (applicant) be separated administratively from the Naval Service under General (Under 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 applicant’s issues state: “I have been a good citizen since discharge.” and “I have been working and saving money to go to college.” The applicant...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00916

    Original file (ND04-00916.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. The Applicant contends that his problems in the Navy can be attributed to his mother’s illness and personal stress. 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...