Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00304
Original file (ND00-00304.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-SMSA, USN
Docket No. ND00-00304

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 000105, 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 000824. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, NDRB discerned no impropriety but did find an inequity in the characterization of the applicant’s service. The Board’s vote was 4-1 that the character of the discharge shall change and unanimous that the reason shall change. The discharge shall read: HONORABLE / SECRETARIAL AUTHORITY, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, 3630900.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

1. I thank you for this consideration, I (applicant) made a mistake while in the Navy and request forgiveness. I currently live in Washington DC and serve the public in a daily basis. Reason for this request I would like to pursue my dreams (school) and be able to take care of more than just me one day.

 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)     930226 - 930718  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 930719               Date of Discharge: 970516

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 03 09 28
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 18                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 34

 Highest Rate: SMSN

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.50 (3)    Behavior: 3.53 (3)                OTA: 3.70

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM, SSDR (2), AFSM, SASM, AFEM,
BER (3)
Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

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

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

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

970131:  Medical entry: A: Adjustment disorder. P: Refer to psychology for further evaluation. Appointment at BMC Mayport Psychology at 0800, 3Feb97. Refer to chaplains for counseling.

970325:  Psychology: Seen in clinic after sexual assault by two males while doing laundry in the barracks. He is to have EMG in Neuro and will wait for these results before pursuing further psychiatric diagnosis.

970501:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 91: Disrespect toward a chief petty officer, violation of UCMJ Article 92 (3 specs): Failure to obey, violation of UCMJ Article 128 (2 specs): Assault SMC on 1May97.
         Award: Forfeiture of $500 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to SMSA. No indication of appeal in the record.
970501:  Psychology emergency evaluation: Imp: Axis I: PTSD symptoms due to sexual assault. Disp: Member to NH-ER Jax for evaluation.
970502:  Medical entry: A: adjustment disorder with mixed emotional features. P: 1 DC to LIMDU, 2 command notified about the disp, 3 He will be seen by Neurology, Chiropractor and P.T. dept, 4 no shipboard assignment.
Discharge package missing from service record.

970516:  DD Form 214: Discharge under other than 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 970516 under other than 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 but inequitable based on the applicant’s entire service record (C and D).

The NDRB found the negative aspects of the applicant’s service were outweighed by his honorable service over 3 years 9 months and 28 days. Relief is warranted.

 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 | 2002_Navy | ND02-01073

    Original file (ND02-01073.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: USNR (DEP) 880220 - 880831 COG Active: None Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 880901 Date of Discharge: 901127 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 02 02 27 Inactive: None No indication of appeal in the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00253

    Original file (ND02-00253.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 000315 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct (A). However, upon further review of the documentation, the Board discerned an impropriety in the applicant’s discharge. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-01163

    Original file (ND01-01163.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-01163 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010910, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. 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 Copy of Conservatorship of applicant dated April 9, 2001Six pages from applicant's service...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-01072

    Original file (ND99-01072.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Issues Prior to the documentary discharge review, the applicant introduced no issues as block 8 on the DD Form 293 is blank. I have no choice but to direct his separation with a General discharge, under honorable conditions. You should read Enclosure (5) of the Directive before submitting such a complaint.

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00419

    Original file (ND99-00419.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    980129: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence from unit 0720, 980116 to 1020, 980116. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 980706 with a general under honorable conditions for misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct (A). There was nothing in the records, nor did the applicant provide any documentation, to indicate there existed an error of fact, law, procedure, or discretion at the time of discharge.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00578

    Original file (ND03-00578.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions and the reason for the discharge be changed to “orderly conduct either or.” The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00021

    Original file (ND01-00021.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) Appointment of veterans service organization as claimant's representative form dated April 19, 2000 selecting American LegionStatement from applicant (9 pages)Statement from applicant's father dated March 21, 2000Fifty-four pages from applicant's service record PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-01057

    Original file (ND00-01057.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 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: USNR (DEP) 970930 - 980615 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 980616 Date of Discharge: 990905 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 01 02 20 Inactive: None to wit: wrongfully having personal gear...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00711

    Original file (ND03-00711.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-00711 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030324. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions. The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-01118

    Original file (ND02-01118.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A day later, on August 17, I was told by legal (PO1 S_) in TPU to sign a new admin sep notice but this time the reason was "PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT" (MILPERSMAN 1910-140) therefore not entitled to sep. pay. At this time, the Applicant has not provided such documentation for the Board to consider.The Applicantis reminded that he remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received at the NDRB within 15 years from the date of his discharge. PART IV -...