Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01078
Original file (ND03-01078.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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


ex-RMSN, USN
Docket No. ND03-01078

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20030605. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review. The Applicant did not list any representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20040504. 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 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 3630600.


PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION


Issues, as stated
Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

 “1. I J_ O_ M_ of my own free will and accord respectfully request that my discharge be reviewed to be upgraded to honorable because during my pre-trial my legal representation was inadequate and bias.

2. I was discharge because I refused to attend mariage counseling with my now-ex-wife due to her infidelity and our apparent cultural difference. I would have attended, but only with an assurance of a divorce in which she refused to give me at that time.

3. I proudly served within the millitary during the gulf war. Adherd to the zero policy law concerning drugs and alcohol. And was Honorablely discharged 8-20-91 in good standing and faithful to my country.

4. During my last 6 months leading up to my discharge I was psychologically impaired due to a stock market marriage wich was doomed to plummet downward leaving me a dis-honored veteran, who is now a pillar within my community seeking and requesting honorable status.”

 Applicant marked the box "I HAVE LISTED ADDITIONAL ISSUES AS AN ATTACHMENT TO THIS APPLICATION." None were found.
Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Character reference, dated May 16, 2003 (3 copies)

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     870825 - 880306  COG
          Active: USN                        880307 - 910819  HON
Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 910820               Date of Discharge: 960610

 Length of Service (years, months, days):
         Active: 04 09 21
          Inactive: None
Age at Entry: 24                          Years Contracted: 6

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 37
Highest Rate: RM3

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):
Performance: 3.77 (7)    Behavior: 3.71 (7)                OTA: 3.69

 Military Decorations: None
Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM, SASM (2), SSDR (3), NER, KLM, MUC (2)
Days of Unauthorized Absence: 1

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

930629:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence from unit.
         Award: Restriction for 14 days. No indication of appeal in the record. [Extracted from Commanding Officer’s message dated 960520.]
960501:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence from 0800, 960415 to 0700, 960417 (1 day/surrendered).
         Award: Restriction for 14 days, extra duty for 30 days, reduction to RMSN. Restriction suspended for 6 months. No indication of appeal in the record.
960506:  Psychiatric evaluation: Primary diagnosis: Personality disorder, not otherwise specified with dependent and antisocial features.
960507:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of personality disorder and misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense as evidenced by assault of your spouse, Article 128 offense committed during your current enlistment.
960508:  Applicant advised of 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 and to submit a statement.
960520:  Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of personality disorder and misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.
960530:  BUPERS directed 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 19960610 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 and D).
Issue 1. The Applicant states that his discharge be upgraded because his legal representation was inadequate and biased. The Applicant submitted no evidence of this discrepancy and there is no evidence of impropriety or inequity as a matter of record. Relief denied.
Issue 2. The record shows the Applicant was discharged for Commission of a Serious Offense as evidenced by assault of spouse. Relief denied.

Issue 3. The Board applauds the Applicant’s honorable discharge on 19910820. However, relief on this basis is not appropriate. Relief denied

Issue 4. The Applicant contends that his problems in the Navy can be attributed to his being "psychologically impaired". While he may feel that his family problem was the underlying cause of his misconduct, the record clearly reflects his willful misconduct and demonstrated he was unfit for further service. The evidence of record did not show that the Applicant was either not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions. Relief on this basis is 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 documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments or any other evidence related to his discharge 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 9, effective
22 Jul 94 until 02 Oct 96, Article 3630600, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL 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 | 2000_Navy | ND00-00355

    Original file (ND00-00355.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    If I had property that was stolen and knew the items were stolen, I could not justly be held guilty of the other charges. 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) 910326 - 910521 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 910522 Date of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-01107

    Original file (ND99-01107.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    930713: Applicant advised of his rights and having elected 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.930714: Commanding officer recommended discharge under honorable conditions (general) by reason of convenience of the government due to enuresis and misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.930803: BUPERS directed the applicant's discharge...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00989

    Original file (ND00-00989.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-OSSN, USN Docket No. 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: “My discharge was based on one isolated incident out of 2 years continuous naval service with no previous disciplinary problems.” The applicants misconduct, violation...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00812

    Original file (ND00-00812.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 980615 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct (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).The applicant’s issue states: “I was discharged with an under other than honorable conditions due to the issue I...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00444

    Original file (ND03-00444.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (Failure of the command PRT due to being over body fat standards. The Board notified Commander, Naval Personnel Command, Millington, TN and recommended the DD Form 214 be corrected or reissued.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00847

    Original file (ND02-00847.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00847 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020603, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 Letter from Applicant PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00265

    Original file (ND04-00265.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. At this time, the Applicant has not provided sufficient documentation for the Board to consider an upgrade. The Applicant can provide documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments or any other evidence related to his discharge at that time.

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-01168

    Original file (ND99-01168.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-RMSN, USN Docket No. After four years of my discharge, I am asking for my honorable discharge. The NDRB found the applicant’s issue non decisional.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00868

    Original file (ND00-00868.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.960111: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 112: Drunk on duty on 15Dec95. I strongly recommend he be separated from the naval service and characterizing his discharge as Other than Honorable.960716: Chief of Naval Personal recommended to Assistant Secretary of the Navy (Manpower and Reserve Affairs) applicant be discharged General (under Honorable...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00657

    Original file (ND01-00657.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    940922: An Administrative Discharge Board, based upon a preponderance of the evidence and by unanimous vote, found that the applicant had committed a serious offense, that the misconduct warranted separation, and recommended discharge general under honorable conditions. 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 the...