Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00652
Original file (ND00-00652.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-SKSR, USN
Docket No. ND00-00652

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 000424, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The applicant requested a personal appearance hearing discharge review. The applicant listed the Veterans Assistance, Department Veterans Affairs as his representative on the DD Form 293. In the acknowledgement letter to the applicant, he was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) does not travel; all hearings are held in the Washington DC area. The NDRB also advised that the board first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 001206. 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 - Pattern of Misconduct, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

1. (Applicant) enter THE U.S. NAVY ON DECEMBER 4, 1989, AT THE AGES OF #18, EIGHTEEN, BORN AUGUST 26, 1971. (APPLICANT), WAS DISCHARGE AT THE AGE OF (21) TWENTY ONE, JULY 21, 1992.

I DISCOVED THAT I HAVE GONE THROUGH SOME LIFE THREATENING EXPERIENCE IN THE GULF WAR DESERT STORM ENGAGEMENTS.

I STIL CONTINUE TO HAVE DREAMS EXPERIENCE, THE GULF WAR SYNDRONE". MY DREAMS CONCERNING THE TRAUMA WITH NIGHTMARE. THE SYMPTOMS ALWAYS SEEMED TO CENTER AROUND MEMORIES FROM GULF WAR SYNDRONE. THE TYPE OF INJURIES WERE ENCOUNTERED AS THE RESULT ON INCIDENT OF MILITARY SERVICE UNDER THE GULF WAR ILLNESSES, HEADACHE FATIGUE, GASTRONINTESTINAL MEMORY LOSS, RESPIRATOR DISTRESS AND RASH, DEPRESSION, GULG SYDRONE STRESS DISORDER SYMPTOMS OF GULF WAR SYNDROME TIGGERED BY SMELLS TASTES AND INCLUDING FIRE AND SMOKE, THAT RECALL THE CONFLICT THAT FOUGHT IN THE GULF WAR.

I HAVE HEALTH PROBLEMS, MY SREVICE RECORDS WILL SHOW COMBAT HISTORY MY DD-DISCHARGE #214 HAVE MY DECORATION AND MEDALS, COMMENDATION CITATION AWARDS

I RECEIVED THE NATIONAL DEFENSE SERVICE MEDAL, AWARD SOUTHWEST ASIA" AUGUST 2, 1990" SERVICE MEDAL JANUARY 16, 1991" SOUTHWEST ASIA AWARDED JANUARY 17, 1991"

THE KUWAIT LIBERATION MEDAL THE DESERT STORM, SERVICE MEDAL MARCH 13, 1991" (APPLICANT) HAD (24) MONTHS FOREIGN SEA SER"

 THE TRAUMATIC EVENT IS PERSISTENTLY RE-EXPERIENCE AND RECURRENT AND INTRUSIVE DISTRESSING RECOLLECTION OF THE EVENTS, INCLUDING IMAGES, THOUGHT, WITH PERCEPTION OCCUR FRIGHTENING DREAMS ALSO RECURRENT DISTRESSING DREAMS OF PAIN FUL FEELING OF DETACHMENT ESTRANGMENT FROM OTHET DIFFICULTY CONCENTRATING CHRONIC STRESS.

I AM COMPLAINING THAT MY CONDITION HAS WORSEN, VERY PAINFUL SEVERITY MANIFESTATION IN DIFFIQUTLT FALLING OR STAYING ASLEEP. I AM A PATIENT AT THE VET'S CENTER V.A FOR CULF SYNDRONE STRESS DISORDER COUNSELING,

I WAS EGHTEEN 18) YEARS OLD I HAD 24) TWENTY FOUR, MONTHS OF FOREIG SERVICE

I WAS TWENTY ONE (21) YEARS OLD, WHEN I WAS DISCHARGE CHRONICITY OF THE INTENSE PSYCHOLOGICAL DISTRESS OF EXPOSURE TO THE ASPECT OF TRAUMATIC EVENT OF THE GULG WAR ILLNESSES, I WILL REQUIRE PSYCHOTHERAPY BECAUSE OF PERSIAN GULF WAR SYNDROME,

DUE TO THE PETITIONER AGE, LENGTH OF SERVICE "PERSONNEL DECORATION NOT TO MENTION PROFICIENT PERFORMANCE OF DUTY WITH DUE CONSIDERATION SUFFICIENTLY MERITORIOUS TO WARRANT REHABILITATION AND COUNSELING OR MEDICAL MENTAL STATUS EVALUATION BY PSYCHOLOGIST BEFORE DISCHARGE ALCOHOL AND DRUG ABUSE COUSELING I RECEIVED LETTERS OF COMMENDATION, I HAD COMBAT, I WAS YOUTHFUL IMMATURITY FOR WAR , I WAS CLOSE TO MY FINISHING MY TOUR THAT IT WAS UNFAIR TO GIVE ME A BAD DISCHARGE WITH MERITORIOUS AWARDS

Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
Copy of DD Form 214 (2 copies)
Two pages from applicant's service record
Statement in support of upgrade from counsel
Letter from counsel
Newspaper article
Statement in support of upgrade from counsel

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: None
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     891031 - 891203  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 891204               Date of Discharge: 920721

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 02 07 18
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 18                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 55

 Highest Rate: SKSN

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.60 (2)    Behavior: 3.30 (2)                OTA: 3.60

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM, NUC, SASM (2), KLM

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/Misconduct – Pattern of misconduct, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

911220:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Absence without leave.
         Award: Forfeiture of $450 per month for 1 month, restriction and extra duty for 15 days. No indication of appeal in the record.
920305:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence 1230-1350, 26Feb92, violation of UCMJ Article 92: Failure to obey lawful order.
         Award: Restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to SKSA. Reduction suspended for 6 months. No indication of appeal in the record.

920307:  Retention Warning from USS FIFE (DD 991): Advised of deficiency (Disciplinary infractions and pattern of misconduct. Two CO's NJP for violations of Articles 86 (absence from appointed place of duty) and Article 92 (failure to obey lawful order).), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

920502:  Vacate suspended reduction to SKSA awarded at CO's NJP dated 5Mar92.
920502:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Failing to go to place of duty.
         Award: Restriction for 45 days, reduction to SKSR. No indication of appeal in the record.
920604:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Absence from unit, organization, or place of duty; violation of the UCMJ, Article 92 (2 specs): Failure to obey lawful order.
         Award: Forfeiture of $390 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days. No indication of appeal in the record.
920606:  USS FIFE (DD 991) notified applicant of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct as evidenced by three or more punishments under the UCMJ within the current enlistment and by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.
920606:          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.
920607:  Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.

920626:  BUPERS directed the applicant's 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 920721 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 and equitable (C and D).

 The applicant’s issue states that he was 18 years old on enlistment and discharged at the age of 21. The Board found that the applicant’s age, education level, and test scores qualified him for enlistment. While he may feel his immaturity was a factor that contributed to his action, 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 is not warranted.

The applicant’s issue states that he is suffering from some service related ailments. The NDRB found nothing in the applicant’s record to support this issue. At the time of discharge the applicant was found “fit for separation.” The applicant is encouraged to contact the VA to determine if there is connection of his current medical condition related to his service. Relief is not warranted.
The applicant’s issue states that the applicant’s campaign medals and awards warrant an upgrade to the discharge. While the NDRB found these unit and campaign medals in the applicant’s service record, they in themselves do not mitigate the applicant’s documented misconduct. Relief is not warranted.

 The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the re characterization of a discharge. The applicant must be aware that there is no law or regulation which provides that an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time, or good conduct in the civilian life subsequent to leaving the service. Normally, to permit relief, an error or injustice must have been found to have existed during the period of enlistment in question. Outstanding post-service conduct, to the extent that such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review, may be considered by the NDRB.

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. Representation at personal appearance hearing is highly recommended.



Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

 A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C, effective 15 Aug 91 until
04 Mar 93), Article 3630600, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT – A 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 | 2005_Navy | ND0500323

    Original file (ND0500323.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of 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 Applicant’s resumé (2 pages) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 891013 - 900807 COG Active: None Period of Service Under Review :Date of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00120

    Original file (ND04-00120.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND04-00120 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20031023. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. At the time of my Captains Mast hearing I was going to receive 45/45 45 days in jail and 45 days no pay.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00366

    Original file (ND04-00366.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND04-00366 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20031218. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. “I am requesting that my discharge be changed from other than honorable to honorable, please review the enclosed information for this possible discharge status change.I would like to request a review of my Discharge and consideration be given to changing it from Other Than Honorable to...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01447

    Original file (ND03-01447.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. No indication of appeal in the record.910416: USS INGRAHAM (FFG 61) notified Applicant of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct as evidenced by three nonjudicial punishments under the UCMJ within the current enlistment.910416: Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00711

    Original file (ND00-00711.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation Only the applicant's service and medical records were reviewed, as the applicant did not provide additional documentation to be considered by the Board. Drinks 12-16 times a month. The applicant is directed to petition the Board of Naval Corrections for relief on this issue.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-01040

    Original file (ND04-01040.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. 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. The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the...

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0500791

    Original file (MD0500791.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    My record of promotions showed I was generally a good service member - (A92.12). Statement: In accordance with 32 CFR 724, and SECNAVINST 5420.173D, the Veterans of Foreign Wars submits to the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) the above issue and following statement in supplement to the Applicant’s petition. The Applicant contends that his record of promotions showed he was a good service member and that the incidents that lead to his discharge were out of character.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00802

    Original file (ND02-00802.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) also advised that the board first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION When a part didn't cross-reference and I recognized the part, I told him I had a few more parts to put up.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-01059

    Original file (ND00-01059.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 Thirty-one pages from applicant's service record PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: None Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 900720 Date of Discharge: 930330 Length of Service (years, months,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00683

    Original file (ND02-00683.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00683 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020415, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable and the reason for the discharge be changed to Secretarial Authority. Documentation Only the Applicant's service and medical records were reviewed, the Applicant did not provide additional documentation for the Board to consider. ]920430: CO, USS BOWEN notified Applicant of intended recommendation for discharge under...