Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01397
Original file (ND03-01397.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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


ex-SA, USN
Docket No. ND03-01397

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20030820. 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 discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20040526. 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 1910-142 (formerly 3630605).

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION


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

 1. “There were not enough incidents to warrant my bad discharge, aswauth [as such warrants an upgrade to honorable].”

2. “This was my first and only NJP, aswauth.”

3. “My record showed I was generally a good service member, aswauth.”

4. “The punishment I got at discharge was too harsh - it was much worse than most people got for the same offense, aswauth.”

 Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Letter from Applicant, undated
Job/character reference, dated April 12, 2002
 Job/character reference, dated April 8, 2002
 Character reference, undated
Letter from Department of the Navy, dated February 26, 2003
 Letter from Naval Reserve Recruiting, dated December 20, 2002
 Telephone list
Letter from United States Senate, dated March 24, 2003
 Letter to Applicant from United States Senate, dated July 2, 2003
 Letter to United States Senator, dated June 26, 2003
Letter to Applicant from United States Senate, dated April 11, 2003
 Letter to Applicant from United States Senate, dated March 28, 2003
 Letter to Applicant from United States Senate, dated July 25, 2003
 Letter to United States Senator, dated July 18, 2003
Applicant’s DD Form 214 (Member 1 and 4)

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: USNR(DEP)               990702 - 990928  COG
         Active: None
Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 990929               Date of Discharge: 000810

 Length of Service (years, months, days):
         Active: 00 10 12
          Inactive: None
Age at Entry: 24                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 10 GED           AFQT: 69
Highest Rate: SN

 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: 33**
*No marks found.
 **Unauthorized absence extracted from Block 29, DD Form 214.
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 :

000508:  Psychiatric evaluation: Diagnostic Assessment: Axis I: Adjustment disorder with depressed mood, Axis II: Personality disorder not otherwise specified with antisocial, schizoid, and narcissistic traits, Axis III: No diagnosis//Please see medical record. Axis IV: Problems with primary support group; routine military stressors, Axis V: 51-60 moderate symptoms. Recommendations: Highly recommend expeditiously administrative separation.
000810:  DD Form 214: Applicant discharged under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-142.
Applicant’s discharge package missing from service record.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 20000810 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (A). In the absence of a discharge package, the Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (B), and, after a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, found that the discharge was proper and equitable (C and D).
Issues 1, 2, 3, and 4: The Applicant states his discharge was based on one isolated incident in 10 months. Despite a servicemember’s prior record of service, certain serious offenses, even though isolated, warrant separation from the naval service in order to maintain proper order and discipline. While he may feel that his youth and immaturity were contributing factors, they do not mitigate the Applicant’s disobedience of the orders and directives that regulate good order and discipline in the naval service, demonstrating he was unsuitable for further service. The Applicant’s service record is marred by award of nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for 33 days of unauthorized absence, thus substantiating the misconduct for which he was separated. Separation under these conditions generally results in characterization of service under other than honorable conditions. The evidence of record does not demonstrate that the Applicant was treated more harshly than other and that he was not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions. The Board could discern no impropriety or inequity and therefore considered his discharge proper and equitable. Relief denied.
Concerning a change in reenlistment code, the NDRB has no authority to change reenlistment codes or 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.

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 relief, based on post-service conduct. At this time, the Applicant has not provided sufficient verifiable documentation of good character and conduct to mitigate his misconduct while on active duty.

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 28, effective
30 Mar 00 until 29 Aug 00, 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 | 2001_Navy | ND01-00887

    Original file (ND01-00887.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00887 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010626, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214. Additionally, 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00811

    Original file (ND04-00811.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND04-00811 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20040422. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. 010927: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge general (under honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense and alcohol rehabilitation failure.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00294

    Original file (ND02-00294.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214. 000821: Commanding Officer recommended discharge general under honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense. 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:...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00511

    Original file (ND00-00511.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    980504: Chief of Naval Personnel to Assistant Secretary of the Navy (Manpower & Reserve Affairs) recommending applicant's discharge other than honorable 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 980619 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (A). After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00431

    Original file (ND00-00431.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-SR, USN Docket No. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 990405 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (A). 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00167

    Original file (ND00-00167.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 981031 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).The applicant introduced no decisional issues for consideration by the Board. PART IV - INFORMATION FOR...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00275

    Original file (ND00-00275.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The discharge shall remain: GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910 - 142 (formerly 3630605).The NDRB did note an administrative error on the original DD Form 214. No further information found in service record PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 980313 general (under honorable conditions) for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (A). After a thorough review of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00111

    Original file (ND01-00111.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    No indication of appeal in the record.000614: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.000614: Applicant advised of her 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.000616: Commanding officer recommended...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00262

    Original file (ND00-00262.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    No indication of appeal in the record.NO DISCHARGE PACKAGE AVAILABLE PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 981030 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (A and 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 (D and E).In response to the applicant’s...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01098

    Original file (ND03-01098.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 III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged on 19990517 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (A). 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...