Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00011
Original file (ND04-00011.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-SR, USN
Docket No. ND04-00011

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 general/under honorable conditions. The Applicant requests a documentary record 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 20040624. 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/PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-140 (formerly 3630600).

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

 “1). Issues pertaining to my discharge.

Punishment by Summary Court Martial
(a) Thirty days confinement, in Naval Brig.
(b) Reduced in rank to E1
(c) Extended 1 year to my EAOS
(d) Retained in military

Aproximatley two months later, I recieved an 0TH based on the call from a certain congressman pertaining to a court order. The court order was for me to have a paternity test on the ship, but my command had no choice but to grant this court order. After I completed the court order I was sent up for an Admin- Separation.

2). Punishment by Captains Mass.
(a) Retained in the military
(b) Suspended in rank for six months
(c) Restriction for 30 days.

Following issues pertaining to my discharge
See attached

To whom it may concern, the dates of my time in the service, were due to justice of the navy
regulations, and injustice upon military commands.

Dates lost: June 15th 1999 — June 21 1999 (7days) May 14th 2000 — May 14th 2000 (lday) May 7th 2001 — June 4th (29 days) and December 8th 2001- Feb. 6th 2001 (61 days)

This letter is in regards in my opinion, to an injustice discahrge. I K_ S_ willingly and knowing the action set forth from the military were disciplinary and fair to some extent, against navy regulations. And I accepted all punishments given for my actions.

Just the same I feel that I have been in a injustice world for, four years. A plot, cover up, security it seems, against military personnel. Descrimination I feel has came upon me, not by gender or race but by rank and title of superior military personnel and commands. I have not seen or heard of any actions taken against superiors for the wrong doings that commands do to their fellow military members.

I joined the military on July 18th of 1998. I was married on December 28th of 1998, to another military personnel from my home town. We thought we would be starting a new adventureous life together, but I was so mistaken. At this time I had no idea I would see and hear the other side of the navy that are hidden from the public eye.

Throughout my term I have dedicated my time, experience and life to the navy, getting high evals, and corresponding with navy regulations.

Charge#1 Days lost: June 15th 1999 - June 21 (7days). I started having problems financially, and emotionally, relating to my wife. Every young man or woman have dreams, but yet we have to sacrifice in order to get what we want out of life. I was currently looking for apartments, navy housing,alone. My wife was currently attending school in Chicago, Ill. We were depressed but yet still fighting, thinking in the end everything will be okay. During June of 1999, my wife and I were having a child, but she was experiencing problems, stress, injustice on her end at school, that in result of the matter having my wife go through a miscarriage, loosing my first child.

Asking my command for help on the USS Shreveport LPD 12 they ignored me, and continued to ignore me, leaving me feeling helpless and alone to be there for my wife, physically and emotionally. Knowing that the past year had been so hard for both of us, I ask for leave and they denied it. Feeling even more helpless, and mentally confused, I went (AWOL) knowing it was wrong against navy regulations. Dealing with financial burdens, stress, seperation from my wife, everyday activities in some matters, and then the miscarriage of my first child. I was lost needing directions and support which my command denied me.

While I was (AWOL),at that time I came home to Rison, AR. My parents alreadyknowing the situation, but did not know I went (AWOL) cried out for help for me, asking what made their son go (U.A) and why didn’t my command help. They called my command expecting to get some type of answer, but only getting dial tones on the other end, from the navies chaplian and other officers hanging up on my parents, and giving them sarcastic remarks to the situation. My parents called the Senators and Congressman telling them of my command’s behavior and their ways of action, later I returned to the USS Shreveport for punishment.

JUSTICE: Was served by navy regulations~ and I took my punishment, thinking I did not give them the chance to help like they claimed after returning from being (U.A).

INJUSTICE: Displayed by not showing any concern to a high quality shipmate asking for help, or ignoring concerning parents request and cry for help, causing my parents to contact Senators and Congressman for appropriate answers.

In September of 1999 the USS.Shreveport went on a med cruise. Getting qualified, enhancing training, picking up medals, and pins, (Surface Warefare) while I was an E—2 and constantly moving back up in rank. My wife was in Norfolk, recovered from our lost we still missed each other, it was a year then my battle group replaced her battle group for the med cruise, so it was still a year being apart. Being apart made it difficult for us financially and emotionally but we were counting the days until we were back together.

On April 8th of 2000 the USS.Shreveport returned home from an 8 month cruise, due to us running aground. The feeling of coming back from a med cruise is great to everyone, even more enjoyable to the first timers such as myself. To me it was more than that, It was a reunion between my wife and I, the day we had been waiting for a year and a half. This was the end of the sacrificing financial burden on each other, feeling depressed, and with struggles I thought. The Captain of the USS.Shreveport allowed me to be the first shipmate off the ship, knowing it had been over a year since I had been with my wife. Relaxing, enjoying my wife and family, I found out that my wife was involved, and living with someone else that was also a navy personnel from her command, the USS.Roosevelt CVN 71.

Case#2. Days lost 00May 14th - 00May 14th (lday) Asking for help, seeing and giving evidence, apartment numbers, addresses, and street names, they couldn’t do anything without a video tape, actually showing the affair taking place, knowing the affair was against navy regulations they never looked into it.

Granted this was a hard time for me, trying to keep strong and manage through it all, it bacame harder for me constantly. Constantly asking for help giving them the chance that I didn’t give them on my first count of being (AWOL).They denied me counseling and leave. I started coming in late to work in relating to the command giving me extramilitary instructions. On the 14th of May 2000 I went (U.A) one day, being punished I went up to a Disciplinary Review Board, with chiefs and senior chiefs and my command master chief as judges.

I approached the board and stated my case, which they already knew what had been happening with me, so all I could do was explain to them how it affected me and how I felt. At that time chiefs and senior chiefs were discussing my case, until my command master chief stated and quote “ I DON”T GIVE A DAMN ABOUT YOU OR YOUR WIFE” because of the crime being my 2nd (U.A).

JUSTICE: By navy regulatins.

INJUSTICE: Showing no concern of my situation, nor a shipmate crying for help, I gave them a month to try and help since my 1st, crime. Dening me time off, looking for justice, but only receiceing injustice.

Alot of navy personnel earned their rank and title by hard work and sacrifice, but yet so do the new generation of the navy. Discrimination of the system is the writing on the wall that alot of navy personnel see’s everyday, but they are too scared to say anything or approach the issue, because of rank and what they might do,and let the system of the military hide what they know is so very wrong.

Case#2 May7th 01 - June 4th 01 (29 days)

On the USS Shreveport I experienced pain in the right foot, I injured my right foot working and I received medical treatment, ace bandages, motrin for 7 months. I complained and finally was seen by a doctor, Dr. D_ B_ orthopedics at Portsmouth Naval Hospital in Virginia. It occured that I had torn two tendons due to haveing no arch to support my muscles for my ankle in either foot. Dr. D_ B_ stated that this injury was serious and thatwith this injury I I should have not been allowed in the service, especially that I didn’t sign a wavier form upon entry. She prescribed me on a BK cast with cruthches and limited duty for 8 months. Because of crutches and my cast I was ordered off the ship in April of 2000, only to go to Little Creek Naval Medical Center on hold, for medical. Research shows the navy was obligated to pay for my living arrangements because it was an on the job injury.
I paid for my living expenses at Shields Hall at Little Creek Naval Base, on May 1st, 2001 they transfered me to (TPU) Temporary Placement Unit, for a medical board and further orders.

BM1 F_ limdu leading petty officer stated at time of arrival the orders I received was incorrect and I had to come back later with correct ones. Knowing I had a BK cast and crutches documented, I had to find transportation to (TPU) back and forth. A shipmate on the USS Shreveport, his aunt gave me transportation back and forth to (TPU). Things were getting accomplished but the down fall of the situation was they didn’t have any rooms for me at the time, asking me do I have anywhere to stay, and I told them I did. I was staying with my friend’s aunt from the USS Shreveport, they wanted a number to contact me arid I provided it to them. In return I had to come in three days straight, and on that third day they told me to go to the doctor and get a copy of a medical form signed by my doctor. That same day I went being in pain I fulfilled their request, and came back to (TPu). Ireturned to my friend’s aunts house in Virginia Beach, and stayed until I received confirmation of a room. With crutches it was too painful for me to go back and forth to (TPU) and it was hard on my friends aunt who worked days.

I stayed there 2 weeks without notifying me of a place to stay, BM1 F_ (TPU) leading petty officer called and asked if I was okay notified me of a Red Cross Message. Later that week I received another phone call from the Command Duty Officer of (TPU), letting me know of that same Red Cross Message. On that following week they called me again stateing I was (UA), and if I didn’t come in that day I would be a deserter. Explaining and lost about the situation, letting them now I had no transportaion at that time, explaining how people were at work. I asked for help, asking for a duty driver to come arid pick me up, they agreed.

Yet they called back one hour later stating duty drivers can’t do that, because it was unofficial business, so I got there the following friday afternoon, when my friend IT3 Parker from the USS Shreveport returned back from a small deployment. I was charged with (UA) for 29 days.

JUSTICE:         Navy Regulations

INJUSTICE: To put the blame on a shipmate who is on limdu and followed guide lines. How could I be (UA) when they called me relating to a Red Cross message previously that week on the phone? How could I be (UA) when they had knowledge knowing all the time my condition and where I was and how to contact me. Injustice is what I dealt with, I was punished for their wrong doings because they drop the ball and forgot about me all that time, being too busy with other personnel. All of this could have been avoided if they would have called to furnish me with a room. They marked me (UA) and put me in captain’s mass and D.R.B. They stated I was using the system because I had my (ESWS) Surface Warfare Pin, and I know how the system works. Their leading petty officers of (TPU) don’t make mistakes and because of my record of events they punished me. Why should my (ESWs) pin be a problem? Why should I go (UA) with a injured right foot? a JUNIOR personnel a blue shirt means nothing to superiors, Its discrimination not with race or gender but with rank and title. It does not make sense to me, a sailor that has good work ethics no problems since the divorce with my ex-wife to be ordered off the ship because of medical status to tryand go (UA). This lesson and punishment of a case that was totally unjust, made me believe and think long and hard about military life in general. Everything that I had been through, its all a game, a system that you either suffer from or for your family and make them last and the military first.

If you don’t play by these games or systems that they drive into you, you are going to hurt even more by the military system. Of all the advertising and display of family and how they claim its so important, because of the type of job we are in. Its sad to look back and see how I had family related issues and had to fight like crazy to prove a point, that I was a man, a human being desperately seeking help.

A sailor, fellow shipmate asking for help and advice from superior officers and commands of the military.

LAST CASE: I finished all correspondence dealing with me being on limited duty, including Asthma which I was diagnosed with while currently being on limited duty with my right foot injury. I received new orders to be attached to the Harry S. Truman CVN 75 on Dec 7th, on a Friday, being in the yards for renovations in portsmouth. At this time I was engaged to be married, Knowing she was pregnant with my child, she drove me to my new command that night, but she was very ill, only to find out later something was wrong with her and the baby. I ask to get home to her and the next day I did. On that up coming sunday December 8th, she had a miscarriage and was currently going to (ARD) Alcohol Rehabilitation Department. I called the Truman’s quarter deck but no one answered, I was new and didn’t know the extension to my department, so I stayed with my fiancee trying to comfort her, the loss was devastating to both of us.

Instead of going back to my command I got scared, thinking what they might do to me, looking back at my past experiences of justice and some injustice wondering will it be the same, crying for help or would they ignore me, having the attitude of not caring, so I stayed gone for a month and a half, thinking that maybe I could make it elsewhere, but after that month and a half I realized I didn’t want to be running the rest of my life. It was my own fault staying as long as I did, even though I had reasons of past experiences making me believe it was right but it was really wrong. So I turned myself into the Base Police and the USS Truman. When I turned myself over to the command, they ask me why didn’t I ask for help and I told them everything that happen to me the past 2 years. They stated they already knew and didn’t understand why my last command did such thing especially to a sailor with such high evals and qualifications.

My punishment was by Summary Court Martial which was a reduction in rate E3 to E1, (30) days in the brig with a year added to my EAOS. During this time period and awaiting punishment being held on pretrial restriction, I put in for a paternity test to see if my first child was really mine, while I was on limited duty from my right foot injury and asthma. I tried to get it done before, but my childs mother C_ J_ left for Mississippi one week after the child was born and before we could complete the test. She was trying to get in touch with me at that time while serving pre—trial restriction. They ignored her and the senators, requesting information concerning the paternity test. I ask if there was a way to get the test on the ship in medical,FSO, and Suppo along with CMC of supply department denied my request stating it could not be done, around this period of time I was sentenced to the brig for (30) days and reduced in rank. Having good evals,qualifications and work ethics the judge of the summary court martial retained me in the military.

After serving my time, I discovered an Admin Seperation form was sent upon me after already being punished. It was in reference to my paternity test. that I and my child’s mother tried to accomplish before hand. It appears that my child’s mother contacted the congressman, who going over the commands heads straight to the admiral and captain of the USS Truman, causing problems within the command. A court order for the paternity test was ordered and held on the command in medical. After all the efforts and request asking for help or being escorted to have the test done they still denied the process. In conclusion the test was completed and I was DISCHARGED from the navy and the USS. Truman.

JUSTICE: Navy Regulations, being U.A that long was wrong on my part, even if I had bad experiences with Commands.

INJUSTICE: Punishing me twice after already serving my punishment and time. Receiving a Administrative Discharge other than honorable because o~ something they brought upon themselves, ignoring my rights.

I was kicked out of the navy, out of revenge from the command. Discrimination not of race, religion or gender, but of rank and title. They discharged me because the congressman went over their heads regarding the paternity test. They decided to punish me a second time. They discharged me with incorrect data on my DD.214 , decoration metals that only one, military education stated none. I entered the navy July 18,1998 they stated 99 of March.
In my closing summary, I am begging you to reevaluate my discharge. I realize some of my actions were wrong, and I desperately needed help as I do now. I do not believe I deserved this type of discharge. I have been denied unemployment due to this discharge.

I am unable to provide for my child, my wife and myself, I pray that you will give me a chance to take care of my family as I deserve to do.

Thank you for considering my request to re-evaluate my discharge status.”
Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Copy of DD Form 214
Reference letter from Judge V_ D_
Reference letter from Sheriff J_ P_ K_
Reference letter from Applicant’s mother
Eight pages from Applicant’s service record

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     980717 - 980729  COG
         Active: None

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 980730               Date of Discharge: 020509

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 03 09 10 (Does not exclude lost time)
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 22                          Years Contracted: 4 (12 months extension)

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 32

 Highest Rate: SN

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.00 (4)    Behavior: 2.00 (4)                OTA: 2.67

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: SSDR

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: 209

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-140 (formerly 3630600).

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

990615:  To UA.

990622:  From UA, to duty.

990702:  To UA.

990817:  From UA, to duty.

990820:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86 (2 specs): UA; violation of UCMJ, Article 87 (2 specs): Missing ships movement.
         Award: Forfeiture of $537.00 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duties for 45 days, reduction to E-1. No indication of appeal in the record.

990820:  Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (UA and missing movement), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

000415:  To UA.

000514:  To UA.

000515:  From UA to duty.

000531:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: UA; violation of UCMJ, Article 87: Missing ships movement.
         Award: Forfeiture of $502.00 per month for 2 months, restriction for 60 days. No indication of appeal in the record.

010501:  To UA.

010601:  From UA, to duty.

010613:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: UA; violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Failure to obey a lawful general order.
         Award: Forfeiture of $200.00 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duties for 30 days, reduction to E-2 (suspended for 6 months). No indication of appeal in the record.

010613:  Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (UA), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.

011208:  To UA.

020207:  From UA, to duty.

 020226:  Summary Court-Martial.
                  Charge I: Violation of UCMJ, Article 86: UA.
                  Finding: Guilty.
                  Sentence: Reduction to E-1 and confinement for 30 days.
 CA action: 020305. Approved finding of guilty and ordered sentence executed.
020226:  To confinement.

020327:  From confinement to duty.

 020410:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and to the commission of a serious offense as evidenced by violations of the UCMJ.
020410:  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

020414:  To UA.

020419:  Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and commission of a serious offense.

020423:  From UA, to duty.

020501:  COMCARGRU TWO directed the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 20020509 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct (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).

 Issues 1 and 2. A characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions is warranted when the member's conduct constitutes a significant departure from that expected of a sailor. The Applicant’s service was marred by award of nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on three occasions, one summary court-martial and adverse counseling entries on other occasions. The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, reflects his disobedience of the orders and directives which regulate good order and discipline in the naval service. The evidence of record does not demonstrate that the Applicant was not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions. Relief denied.
The Applicant’s discharge characterization accurately reflects his service to his country. Normally, to permit relief, an error or inequity must have existed during the period of enlistment in question. No such error or inequity is evident during the Applicant’s enlistment. 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 civilian life, subsequent to leaving the service. Relief not warranted.

The Applicant is reminded that he remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received at the NDRB within 15 years from the date of his discharge. 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 1997 until 21 Aug 2002, Article 1910-140 (formerly 3630600), SEPARATION BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT - PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT.

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 | 2003_Navy | ND03-00387

    Original file (ND03-00387.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-00387 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030107. The Applicant requests that the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions and the reason for the discharge be changed to “general under medical condition.” The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review. My ship was in the Gulf for some time and we did many things we were instructed not to discus off the ship to any one.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00585

    Original file (ND04-00585.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). When I wasn’t making enough in the military and my family was on the verge of being put out on the street, I didn’t know what to do. I married my girlfriend, worked full time, and saved enough money so my family could live while I was gone.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-01026

    Original file (MD04-01026.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD04-01026 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20040607. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions. I was discharged December 13, 2001 from the Marine Corps with an Other Than honorable discharge.

  • 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.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00979

    Original file (ND03-00979.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-00979 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030513. The next day upon arrival on board I was taken to medical and on the Portsmouth Naval Hospital where I stayed for a week and was given a psychological evaluation contracted for safety and was sent back fit for full duty to my command with the recommendation of alcohol rehabilitation Level 3. The summary of service clearly documents that alcohol rehabilitation failure was the reason the applicant...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600383

    Original file (ND0600383.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND06-00383 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20060104. I already knew that she was getting tired of being alone and that she could not bare it anymore but there was not much I could do at that point in time because I was not near San Diego to help out, I do remember trying to got a hold of the Duty Office back on base at some point to talk to someone about this but no one was there to answer my phone call. He told me that he was sorry again for what...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-01091

    Original file (ND04-01091.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND04-01091 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20040622. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. Besides my discharge which not everybody knows about I am very well liked.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600105

    Original file (ND0600105.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    That boat was the cause of my medical problems. I think I’m out of the Navy why am I back here? My discharge was wrongly assessed and needs to be changed to a honorable discharge under medical conditions.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00082

    Original file (ND04-00082.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND04-00082 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20031017. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. As of this time, the Applicant has not provided any documentation for the Board to consider.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-01094

    Original file (ND02-01094.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-01094 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020801, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable and the reason for the discharge be changed. The Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) also advised that the board first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing. My evidence of this situation is Lt. P_ of the USS Truman who went out the way to help me talk to my wife and my wife harassment...