Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00729
Original file (ND02-00729.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-DKSN, USN
Docket No. ND02-00729

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 920430, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The Applicant requested a personal appearance hearing in the Washington, D.C. area. The Applicant did not list a representative on the DD Form 293. In the acknowledgement letter to the Applicant, he was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing.


Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 030124. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, NDRB discerned no impropriety but did discern an inequity in the characterization of the Applicant’s service. The Board’s vote was unanimous that the character of the discharge shall change. The discharge shall change to: HONORABLE/CONDITION, NOT A DISABILITY, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-120 (formerly 3620200).

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as submitted

1. To whom it may concern

I would like to present my case in Washington to state my issue on upgrading my discharge.

The discharge is improper because it does not pertain to my condition.

The discharge does not have and equal out look or professional out look on me, because it does not pertain to me.

This discharge was also presented to me unexplained and not reviewed with personnel man aboard ship I accepted a discharge that I was not aware of the civilian affect that is causing me.

My stay in the Navy was short, but it was the decision I made along with the Captain of my ship to release me from active duty. But this discharge does not suit my situation at all.

I would gladly be able to present my case in Washington, because my future is at stake. I would like my discharge to upgrade to honorable.
Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Copy of DD Form 214 (3)
Letter of Recommendation from Mayor D_ R_ City of Hallandale Beach, FL, dated Jan 25, 2002. Two copies
 Letter of Recommendation from Congressman A_ L. H_, dated Dec 7, 2001
Letter of Recommendation from Congressman A_ L. H_, dated May 21, 2002
Letter from Board for Correction of Naval Records to NCPB, dated April 19, 2002
Letter from Board for Correction of Naval Records to Congressman H_, dated April
19, 2002
Letter from Applicant, dated May 25, 2002
Letter of Recommendation from Staff Assistant D_ L_, dated May 21, 2002
Letter of Recommendation from P_ B_, undated
 Letter of Recommendation from Officer P_ S_, Hallandale Police Department, dated April 7, 2000
Letter of Recommendation from Captain J_ E. K_, Hallandale Police Department, dated April 7, 2000
Letter of Recommendation from Professor W_ P_, Florida Atlantic University, dated June 15, 2002
Letter of Recommendation from Professor A_ P_, Florida Atlantic University, dated May 29, 2002
 Letter of Recommendation from Pastor T_ M_, New Macedonia Missionary Baptist
Church, Riviera Beach, FL, dated May 28, 2002
Police check on Applicant from Tallahassee, Florida, dated June 4, 2002
Letter to Congressman A_ H_, about Applicant, dated May 7 2002
Certificate of Completion presented to Applicant, dated October 1, 1999
Copy of College transcript from Palm Beach FL, for Applicant, undated
 Copy of College transcript from Florida Atlantic University, for Applicant, dated June 26, 2002
 Copies of 3 Awards from High School and grades 1996
 Copies of papers showing the Applicant formed a business in state of Florida, dated June 11, 2001
Copies of 4 Awards from Pembroke Pines Police Explorer Academy
Copy of Internship from Florida Atlantic University, dated August 27, 2001
Letter from Applicant with attachments from the Chief Examiner in MEPS, received
November 26, 2002
 DD Form 2808 from Applicant, received December 2, 2002

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     990409 - 990524  COG
         Active: None

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 990525               Date of Discharge: 000210

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 00 08 17
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 20                          Years Contracted: 4 (12 month extension)

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 50

 Highest Rate: DKSN

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: NMF*        Behavior: NMF             OTA: NMF

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: None

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

*No Marks Found in service record.

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

GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/PERSONALITY DISORDER, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-122 (formerly 3620225).

Administratively corrected to:
 GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/CONDITION, NOT A DISABILITY, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-120 (formerly 3620200).


 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

991210:  Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (inability to adapt to the military service), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.
000126:  Admitted to the Naval Medical Center Portsmouth, VA.
000128:  Discharged from Medical Center. Diagnosis: Adjustment Disorder with Mood Emotional Disturbance. Recommendation: Attending psychiatrist recommends an administrative separation for a severe adjustment disorder per MILPERSMAN 1910-120.

Undated:         Applicant request separation based on the medical condition which he believed to exist, but does not amount to a disability per current Navy guidance. The medical condition is a Severe Adjustment Disorder.

000210:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with a least favorable characterization of service as general (under honorable conditions) under the regulations MILPERMSAN 1910-120 for the convenience of the government on the basis of a physical or mental conditions.
000210:  Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights.
000210:  Commanding Officer advised CNPC that Applicant was discharged with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of convenience of the government - physical or mental conditions. Commanding Officer’s comments, verbatim: [Based on DKSN T_ (Applicant’s) request for separation and LT B_’s medical diagnosis, DKSN T_ (Applicant) is administratively separated from the Naval service for Convenience of the Government – Physical or Mental Conditions. The characterization for separation is General (Under Honorable Conditions).]

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 000210 with a discharge characterization of General (Under Honorable Conditions) for convenience of the government due to a physical or mental condition, not a disability. (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 not equitable (C and D).

Issue 1: The Applicant claims that his discharge was improper because it did not pertain to his condition. The Board determined that the Applicant’s discharge was properly executed however there were several errors detected on the Form DD 214 to include the erroneous Separation Code and Narrative Reason Code. The Form DD 214 should be reissued to accurately reflect the Applicant’s correct reason for discharge; CONDITION, NOT A DISABILITY. The Board did discern an inequity in the discharge characterization. Characterization of service in this type discharge is to be per the serviceman’s performance. Reviewing the Applicant’s available record failed to reveal any evidence that could substantiate characterizing his record of service as anything other than honorable. Though the record is incomplete, normally there will be something to indicate less than acceptable performance, but such is not the case here. Because of that, the Board determined the Applicant service warrants an honorable characterization. Therefore, relief is warranted to correct the inequity of the discharge characterization.

 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 24, effective
20 May 99 until 27 Aug 01, Article 1910-120 (formerly 3620200), SEPARATION BY REASON OF CONVENIENCE OF THE GOVERNMENT - PHYSICAL OR MENTAL CONDITIONS.

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 | 2004_Navy | ND04-00522

    Original file (ND04-00522.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. “A LETTER IS INCLUDED LISTING MY ISSUES The Board found that in the Applicant’s case, the characterization of service should have been the “type warranted by service record.” A review of Applicant’s records indicated an honorable discharge was warranted.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00358

    Original file (ND04-00358.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    _______________________________________________________________________ In accordance with 32 C.F.R., section 724.166, and SECNAVINST 5420.174C, enclosure (1), paragraph 1.16, The American Legion submits to the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB or Board) the above issue and following statement in supplement to this Applicant’s petition.Review of the service record reflects that this former member maintained satisfactory performance and conduct markings with a final ITA of 3.00 and earned...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600239

    Original file (ND0600239.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION Issues, as stated Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application and/or attached document/letter: “ At the time of my discharge the Petty Officer 2 nd Class informed me before I signed my DD 214 form that I was receiving a Honorable Discharge. Regulations indicate that members separated under and entry-level status will receive...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600148

    Original file (ND0600148.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION Issues, as stated Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application and/or attached document/letter: “ Dear NDRB,The following issues are the reasons I believe my discharge should be upgraded to Honorable and the reenlistment code be changed to RE-1 with corresponding Separation Program Number/designator. If I was considered such...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00355

    Original file (ND04-00355.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND04-00355 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20031218. Chief H_ was not designated in writing by the Commanding Officer to be the command UPC until 06 Nov. 2002, which is over two months after this test was taken. (PAGE 9) Exhibit B 7.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00016

    Original file (ND04-00016.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND04-00016 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20031001. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. In the absence of a complete discharge package, the Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (B) and, after a thorough review of the available records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, found that the discharge was proper and...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00762

    Original file (ND02-00762.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    SR arrived at RTC on March 15, 1999 and was referred because SR stated that he was depressed and appeared unmotivated. SR is suitable to report to Separations Division.990401: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with the least favorable characterization of service possible as General (Under Honorable Conditions) by reason of convenience of the Government due to physical or mental conditions as evidenced by a depressive disorder under MILPERMSAN...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00815

    Original file (ND04-00815.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION After Pensacola I chose to take a week of leave time to go home.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501245

    Original file (ND0501245.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION Issues submitted by the Applicant, as an attached document to the DD-293:“ISSUES: WHY AN UPGRADE OR CHANGE IS REQUESTED AND JUSTIFICATION FOR THE REQUESTI received a discharge of General (Under Honorable Conditions) on September 3, 1998 after a little more than one year of service due to a sleepwalking condition (somnambulism). (See the letter of support commending my activities in Block 8). I request that my discharge be upgraded to Honorable...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500005

    Original file (ND0500005.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Commanding Officer’s comments: “After thorough review of the entire case of the SNM, I have determined that the facts and circumstances in this case warrant discharge with a characterization of service of other than honorable conditions.”BUPERS directed the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.970113: NDRB Docket Number ND96-01293, document review conducted. In the Applicant’s case the record clearly documented...