Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-01197
Original file (ND02-01197.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-MSSA, USN
Docket No. ND02-01197

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 020814, 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 030515. 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: GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-142 (formerly 3630605).

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as submitted

1. I am respectfully requesting your office to grant my appeal for the amendment of my discharge from the Navy. In 1997, I was discharged from the Navy with General (Under Honorable Conditions), due to misconduct! I blamed myself for such blunder I made, and I am making an appeal that the "Board" will grant my (Honorable Discharge) so that I could go back to active duty, and the active reserve! Since Sept. 11, 2001, happened to our country. I really wanted to go back to active duty in the Navy, because I wanted to defend it at all cost and if I have to offer my life, "I will", for the sake of my country and the American citizens like me!

Sir/Mama, please give me another chance to serve my country through going back to active service soon! I know that my (RE-4) code now in my DD-214, will not let me go back to the naval service with only (RE-1) code! Again, I am very sorry and longing you will grant my request and another chance to serve my country through (Naval Service)! God bless us! Thank you so much!

Very Respectfully Yours,

 Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Two pages from Applicant 's service
 Applicant 's DD Form 214
Honorable Discharge certificate from Army National Guard, dated January 20, 2000
DD Form 149, dated May 28, 2002

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     950329-950509    COG
         Active: ANG               Unknown - 000120         HON

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 950510               Date of Discharge: 971219

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 02 07 10
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 22                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 57

 Highest Rate: MSSN

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: NMF                  Behavior: NMF             OTA: NMF

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: 28

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

GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-142 (formerly 3630605).

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

950510   Applicant reported to Recruit Training Command, Great Lakes, IL.

950809   Applicant reported to SSC San Diego for temporary duty.

951109   Applicant reported to TPU NAVSTA San Diego, CA.

951117   Applicant reported to USS CHANDLER DDG-996 for duty, homeport San Diego, CA.

971001   Applicant to unauthorized absence. Information available indicates MSSN R_ L. R_ (Applicant), USN, told others onboard he was going to desert or words to that effect. MSSN R_ L. R_ (Applicant) declared a deserter as of 0700, 1 October 1997.

971001   Applicant missed ship ’ s movement.

971029   Applicant surrendered to military authorities, Port Hueneme, CA.

971106:  Fleet Mental Health Unit, Branch Medical Clinic, Naval Station San Diego, CA. Psychiatric Evaluation: Primary diagnosis: Personality disorder NOS, (dependent and borderline features). “ … this member (Applicant) threatens to commit suicide if retained on active duty … He is deemed fit for return to duty for immediate processing for administrative separation … It is also recommended that he not have access to any weapon, not operate government vehicles, work with classified materials, nor be involved with field work …”

971124   Applicant transferred to TPU NAVSTA San Diego, CA.

971212:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Absent from unit 971010 until 971029 (28 days/surrendered), violation of UCMJ, Article 87: Missing movement on 971001.
         Award: Forfeiture of $250 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to MSSA. No indication of appeal in the record.
971215:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense and convenience of the government due to personality disorder.
971215:  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.
971231:  Commanding Officer directed discharge general (under honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense. Commanding Officer’s comments (verbatim): [MSSA R_ ( Applicant ) appeared before nonjudicial punishment proceedings on 97DEC12 as detailed in paragraph 4 above; offenses which normally would warrant an Other Than Honorable Discharge. However, I believe that his medical diagnosis of 97NOV06 for severe personality disorder is an overriding mitigating circumstance for his behavior. Therefore I authorized separation of MSSA R_ ( Applicant ) with a General Discharge by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 971219 with a discharge characterization of general (under 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 and D).

Issue 1: 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, as requested by the Applicant. Neither a less than 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. The “RE-4” code means the former service member is not eligible for reenlistment without prior approval of the Chief of Naval Personnel. Relief denied.

The Applicant’s summary of service is marred by award of non-judicial punishment (NJP). 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. After a complete review of the record, including the evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board determined that the Applicant’s discharge was proper and equitable. An upgrade to honorable would be inappropriate. Relief denied.

T here 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. Evidence 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 relief, based on post-service conduct. After a complete review of the record, including the evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board determined that the Applicant’s discharge was proper and equitable and that his evidence of post service accomplishments was found not to mitigate the misconduct for which he was discharged. 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. 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 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. 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 | ND02-01193

    Original file (ND02-01193.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-01193 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020821, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. Very Respectfully, (Signed by Applicant) Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant's letter to the Board, undated Copy of DD Form 214 Puerto Rico Police Record, dated 29 July 2002 PART II -...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00989

    Original file (ND01-00989.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, there was NO DISCHARGE PACKAGE OR EVALUATION MARKS AVAILABLE, 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: USN None Inactive: USNR (DEP) 951005 - 951015 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 951016 Date of Discharge: 971029 Length of Service (years, months, days): Active: 02 00...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500401

    Original file (ND0500401.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The Applicant’s service was marred by award of a special court-martial for violations of UCMJ Articles 86 (Unauthorized absence), Article 87 (Missing ships movement), and Article 112a (Possession of 8 bottles of steroids). 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 | 2005_Navy | ND0500774.HR

    Original file (ND0500774.HR.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The applicant is asking that the Board upgrade his discharge to honorable. 920522: Commanding Officer, USS WILLIAM H STANDLEY (CG 32) recommended to the Bureau of Naval Personnel that the Applicant be discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600168

    Original file (ND0600168.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Subject member examined by a Medical Officer on [this date]2. 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:Secretary of the Navy Council of Review Boards

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00765

    Original file (ND99-00765.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Decision A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 000417. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 980206 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (A). 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).Regarding the...

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-01086

    Original file (MD02-01086.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Marine Corps. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Letter from Applicant, dated May 17, 0002 Response Letter from BCNR, dated May 7, 2002 Employment Reference Letter, dated April 3, 2002 McKenzie Tank Lines, INC Position Description, dated January 29, 2001 Copies of DD Form 214 (2) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active:...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01383

    Original file (ND03-01383.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-01383 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030819. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions. (f) (1).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 ensure a fair standard his administered,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00549

    Original file (ND03-00549.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to entry level separation or uncharacterized. Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events : 950710: Applicant ordered to active duty.970429: Applicant missed ship’s movement. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged on 19980430 under honorable conditions (general) for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (A).

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00493

    Original file (ND00-00493.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00493 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 991214, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable, general/under honorable conditions or entry level separation or uncharacterized and the reason for the discharge be changed to economic reasons. With his violation of the page 13 warning, GSMFN (applicant) left this command with no other alternate to processing him for administrative separation, and I know of no...