Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00581
Original file (ND02-00581.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-ABHAA, USN
Docket No. ND02-00581

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 020328, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to entry level separation or uncharacterized. The Applicant requested a personal appearance hearing discharge review before a traveling panel closest to Los Angeles, CA. 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) does not travel, all hearings are held in the Washington, DC Area. The Naval Discharge Review Board (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 030107. 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

 1. Respectfully request to speak in person to explain more and voice my opinion. I am not a problem and have never been in trouble before. Was just in a bad situation and received the raw deal. Please notify me about this matter please. I really want this for my life - not the money. Just the respect of family and to respect myself. I have never quit at anything in my life and I am willing to do whatever it takes to be in the Navy once again. But for life this time. Nothing less. I am willing to give my life for the Navy and do whatever it takes to prove myself.

2. I am writing this letter in regards to myself getting back into the Military. I was let out on an Other Than Honorable Discharge in March 2001 and came in Sept 1999. I came in as an ABH; I went to ABH A-School in Pensacola, Florida with a G.P.A of 85-95%. I have been through the training and the classes and don't need to go back through them. I had only one problem and I let it get the best of me. I was stationed in Norfolk, VA, aboard an Aircraft Carrier and was harassed, which made me feel very Uncomfortable and I was willing to let everything go because of it. I used my chain of command for three months and nothing was done about the harassment so I just gave up and let all hope go. I asked to be transferred to shore but was ignored. So I said I wanted out but really didn't want to leave. But I thought what else am I going to do. The J.A.G. officer came and spoke to me and offered me the chance to get out that would be with and Other Than Honorable, but I have never been in trouble before, I didn't know what that was or what it would do to me, I just wanted out and without even a thought I took it. Now ever since then I have regretted not staying in and fulfilling my dream. I let the other person win. And now I have nothing. I really enjoyed the Navy, something I worked very hard for gone in a split second. Everywhere I look I see or am reminded of the Navy and it hurt me to know I was apart of that and I'm not anymore. The Navy, it was home to me and was really the only family I came close to know. I loved my job, the excitement and the rush of watching jets scream past me. Going in and out to sea and best of all seeing the world. I have kept a clean record since I have been out and have spent my time and energy trying with all of my might and with God by my side and in my heart to be let back in. I just ask for another chance to be apart of the fighting spirit of the Navy, And of America. I don't want money or anything I just want to wear my uniform again and to hold my head up high with Honor, Courage and Commitment That's all the payment I need.

 Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Copies of DD Form 214 (2)
Copy of Certificate of Completion (Aviation Boatswain's Mate (Handling) Course,
Class A1 (C-822-2010)
Applicant's Letter of Explanation (3 pages) dated September 23, 2002

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: USN               None
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     990915 - 990928  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 990929               Date of Discharge: 010402

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 01 04 22
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 19                          Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 32

 Highest Rate: ABHAA

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: NMA                  Behavior: NMA             OTA: NMA

Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: None

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: 38

 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 :

001116   Applicant to Unauthorized Absence this date.

001117   Applicant surrendered onboard this date. Absence not excused and charged lost time.

001120   Psychological Evaluation, Medical Department, USS THEODORE ROOSEVELT (CVN 71). Diagnosis: Axis I: Adjustment Disorder with Mixed Disturbance of Emotions and Conduct; Axis II: Avoidant Personality Traits (marked); Axis III: None; Axis IV: Routine Shipboard Duty; Axis V: Current GAF.
         Recommendations: 1. The patient (Applicant) psychologically fit for full duty. He is not suicidal or homicidal, and is entirely responsible for his actions. 2. He was urged to do everything he can to not respond to the harassment so as not to encourage it, and to develop friendships here on the ship so he can have some sort of support network onboard. We will also access available resources onboard to end this. He gave permission to liaison with the chain of command and EO. 3. The above plan was discussed with the patient (Applicant) who understands and concurs.

001123   Applicant to Unauthorized Absence this date.

001127   Applicant surrendered onboard this date. Absence not excused.

010105   Applicant to Unauthorized Absence this date.

010209   Applicant taken by Norfolk Fire & Paramedic Services to DePaul Medical Center for emergency psychiatric intervention and then transferred to Naval Medical Center, Portsmouth. Patient (Applicant) released and instructed to follow-up with Psychologist on USS THEODORE ROOSEVELT (CVN 71).

010210   Applicant to Unauthorized Absence this date.

010212   Applicant returned from unauthorized absence.

010214   Applicant admitted to Naval Medical Center, Portsmouth.

010226   Applicant released from Naval Medical Center, Portsmouth and instructed to return to his ship.

010308:  Summary Court-Martial.
         Charge I: violation of the UCMJ, Article 86: (2 Specifications),
         Specification 1: Unauthorized absence from 010105 to 010210 (36 days); Specification 2: Unauthorized absence from 010210 to 010212 (2 days). Charge II: violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Violation of a lawful general regulation (wearing a tongue ring on 010212).
         Sentence: Confinement for 30 days.
         CA action 010311: Sentence approved and ordered executed except for that portion of awarded confinement which has not already been served, which is hereby remitted.

010310:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.
010310:          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.
010310   Ship’s psychologist recommendation on the disposition of ABHAN H_ (Applicant), verbatim comments: [I have been seeing Airman H_ (Applicant) since November 2000. Throughout the past three months, he has exhibited very poor coping skills, a very low tolerance for stress, and very poor judgment. He repeatedly engaged in self-defeating behavior, even while his chain of command was trying to help him and he was seen for counseling on a frequent basis. During this period, he also made at least two suicidal gestures due to his difficulty managing his life. He was eventually hospitalized at NMC Portsmouth, was diagnosed with Major Depressive Disorder, attended a crisis management intervention program at NMC Portsmouth, and was started on antidepressant medications. I have continued to see him on a frequent basis. Airman H_ (Applicant) continues to just barely cope, as evidenced by his marked shaking whenever he is subjected to stress, and his recent refusal to eat. The longer he is confined, the more problematic his behavior will become. I strongly recommend that his confinement be terminated at the earliest opportunity, and that he be expeditiously separated from the military since he has clearly proven that he has not been able to adapt to the Navy.]

010311:  Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense. Commanding Officer’s comments (verbatim): [Through misconduct as evidenced by his summary court-martial conviction of 8 March 2001 which included a long-term unauthorized absence, ABHAA H_ (Applicant) has demonstrated an inability to adapt to the Navy environment or live up to our standards of performance and personal conduct. Additionally, my ship’s psychologist has been counseling ABHAA Henley on a frequent basis and recommends that he be expeditiously separated from the naval service because of his failure to cope with the everyday rigors of shipboard and military life (enclosure (2) pertains). I have remitted the unserved portion of the confinement he was awarded at his summary court-martial based solely on that recommendation. Based upon his misconduct, I believe that ABHAA H_ (Applicant) has no potential for further naval service and recommend that he be separated with an Other Than Honorable discharge.]

010314:  Commander, Carrier Group EIGHT authorized 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 010402 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, D and E).

Issue 1: The NDRB determined that the evidence provided by the Applicant, describing his perspective of mitigating and extenuating factors, is not sufficient to offset the seriousness of the offenses for which his discharge was awarded. The Board considered the propriety and equity within the specific circumstances of the Applicant’s case and determined that the discharge and the discharge characterization were proper and equitable. There is no evidence in the official record, nor did the Applicant provide any certifiable documentation that there was any impropriety during his processing for separation from the Navy. The Applicant’s service is marred by a Summary Court-Martial for violations of the UCMJ to include an unauthorized absence in excess of 30 days and violation of a lawful general regulation. Both of these violations could have resulted in either a dishonorable or bad conduct discharge and additional confinement. 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.

 Issue 2: The NDRB has no authority to make recommendations to permit reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Naval Service or any other branch of the Armed Forces. Neither a less than fully honorable discharge nor an unfavorable “RE” code is, in itself, a bar to reenlistment. A request for waiver is normally done only during the processing of a formal application for enlistment through a recruiter. Relief is therefore denied.

The following information is provided for the benefit of the Applicant. 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 civilian life, subsequent to leaving the service. 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 more thorough understanding of the Applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review. Verifiable proof of any post-service accomplishments must be provided in order for the Applicant to claim post-service conduct and behavior as a reason to upgrade a less than honorable discharge. E vidence of continuing educational pursuits, a positive employment record, documentation of community service, and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities, are examples of verifiable documents that should be provided to receive consideration for an upgrade based on post-service conduct.

The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of discharge. The Applicant can provide additional documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments at that time. Representation at a personal appearance hearing is recommended but not required.
Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

 A. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 31, dated 20 Feb 01, effective 25 Jan 01 until Present, Article 1910-142 [formerly 3630605]. SEPARATION 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.
E. In Appendix 12 of the Manual for Courts-Martial, a punitive discharge is authorized for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Article 86: unauthorized absence for a period in excess of 30 days if adjudged at a Special or General Court Martial.

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 | ND02-00326

    Original file (ND02-00326.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION I tried several times to get some time off so I could take care of these other problems but even after explaining my situation to my Division Chief, he told me the only thing that was important was the inspection and that I would just have to put my problems on hold until after the inspection was over. I had stopped the partying several years back and only had the occasional drink from time to time.

  • USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-00608

    Original file (MD01-00608.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD01-00608 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010402, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. They told me that if it didn't help me, they would recommend that I be discharged, but after it was over, I felt NO different and they told my command that I was "psychiatrically fit" for full duty my hope was crushed. Please contact me with information about this query at one of the numbers listed below.A_ G. H_...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-01014

    Original file (ND02-01014.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    M_ H_ (Applicant) OSSA H_ (Applicant)'s personality disorder seems to have manifested after he learned that he would not be administratively separated after returning from a 15 day UA. Relief denied.The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of discharge.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600108

    Original file (ND0600108.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    if I was at risk to my self and my fellow shipmate then I could understand that my medical record would passed up the chain of command but it is stated very clearly that I was not at risk to myself and fellow shipmates and I was fit for full duty. The Applicant states that because of his discharge he lost his G.I. The Veterans Administration determines eligibility for post-service benefits not the Naval Discharge Review Board.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00362

    Original file (ND02-00362.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00362 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020204, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. TO: NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD As the representative, we ask that consideration be given to equitable relief, as this is a matter that involves a determination whether a discharge should be changed under the equity standards, to include any issue upon which the Applicant submits to the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500896

    Original file (ND0500896.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DISCHARGE MEDICATIONS: None DISCHARGE INSTRUCTIONS: 1. She was discharged on no medications. She adamantly denied then and denies now any thoughts of suicide at the time – she was just “pissed.” Her mood was relatively stable until last weekend when she had an “up” episode that lasted from Thursday to Monday.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00652

    Original file (ND04-00652.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND04-00652 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20040309. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. I honestly believe that if I had met my wife back then, that I could have been a career sailor.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501524

    Original file (ND0501524.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Member was not processed for discharge in October 2002 following second NJP, per instructions in MILPERSMAN 1910-138. This appears to make evident that the command failed to process me for All Reasons which warranted separation) as per MILPERSMAN 1910-210. The Applicant contends that his discharge is improper because he was not processed for discharge in October 2002 following his second NJP, per instructions in MILPERSMAN 1910-138.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600099

    Original file (ND0600099.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND06-00099 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20051012. The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). It was then that another discharge was recommended, but this time the Captain signed it.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00658

    Original file (ND04-00658.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION A FEW MONTHS HAD GONE BY AND I TOLD FIRST CLASS T_ THAT I DID NOT WANT TO WORK WITH PETTY OFFICER W_. SO I DIDN’T LIKE WHAT HE WAS SAYING TO ME, SO I FINISHED THE JOB AND WENT BACK TO MY DIVISION.