Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00807
Original file (ND04-00807.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-EWSN, USN
Docket No. ND04-00807

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. 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 20050201. 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 – commission of a serious offense, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

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

1. “ I AM A GULF WAR VET. I AM BI-POLAR AND NEED HELP MY MISCONDUCT WAS A DIRECT RESULT OF MY CONDITION. I AM CURRENTLY UNDER A DOCTORS CARE. I WAS A MIS-DIAGNOSED IN NAVAL HOSPITAL PENSACOLA, FL. I WOULD LIKE AN UPGRADE SO I CAN CONTINUE TREATMENT OF MY LIFE LONG CONDITION. I DON’T BLAME THE MILITARY BUT IF I COULD OF GOTTEN MEDICATION I WOULD STILL BE SERVING MY COUNTRY.”

Documentation

In addition to the service record, 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):
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     880216 - 880814  COG
         Active: None

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 880815               Date of Discharge: 920723

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 03 11 09
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 18                          Years Contracted: 4 (24 months extension)

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 61

 Highest Rate: EW3

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.30 (2)             Behavior: 3.60 (2)                OTA : 3.4

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: SSDR, NDSM, KLM

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: 31

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/Misconduct – commission of a serious offense, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

910308:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 117: Provoking words.
         Award: Forfeiture of $200 per month for 1 month, restriction and extra duty for 14 days. No indication of appeal in the record.

920423:  Applicant declared a deserter having been UA since 1500, 24 MAR 1992.

920424:  Applicant surrendered (31 days UA).
920507:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86 (4 Specs): Failure to go to appointed place of duty and UA.
         Award: Forfeiture of $500 per month for 2 month(s), restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to next inferior paygrade. No indication of appeal in the record.
920526:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.
920526:  Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights.
920610:  Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.

920711:  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 19920723 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: Normally, to permit relief, an error or injustice must have existed during the period of enlistment in question. No such error or injustice occurred during the Applicant’s enlistment. While he may feel that his psychological problems 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. His service record is marred by award of non-judicial punishment (NJP) on two separate occasions for violations of the UCMJ, Article 86 (UA for a total of 31 days) and Article117 (provoking words) thus substantiating the misconduct . Unauthorized absence greater than 30 days is considered a serious offense. 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 Veterans Administration determines eligibility for post-service benefits not the Navy Discharge Review Board (NDRB). There is no requirement or law that grants recharacterization solely on the issue of obtaining Veteran’s benefits and this issue does not serve to provide foundation upon which the Board can grant relief.

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), effective 15 Aug 91 until
04 Mar 93, Article 3630600, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT – COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE.

 B. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part II, AUTHORITY/POLICY FOR DEPARTMENTAL DISCHARGE REVIEW.

C. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part V, Para 502, Propriety .

D. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part V, Para 503, Equity .

 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 “ http://Boards.law.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:

                  Secretary of the Navy Council of Review Boards
                   Attn: Naval Discharge Review Board
                   720 Kennon Street SE Rm 309
                  Washington Navy Yard DC 20374-5023


Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-01023

    Original file (ND02-01023.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-01023 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020711, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. No indication of appeal in the record.920710: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: UA from unit from 920526 to 920615 (20 days/S); violation of UCMJ, Article 87: Missed ship's movement on 920527. The Applicant is reminded that he remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00211

    Original file (ND02-00211.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, 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: None Inactive: None Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 890421 Date of Discharge: 920925 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 03 02 21 Does not exclude time lost. ]920810: Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00220

    Original file (ND99-00220.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a review of the Former Service Members (FSM) DD Form 293 Application for the Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the Armed Forces of the United States and all of the evidence assembled for review, we continue to support the issues as raised by the FSM.The FSM was released from the US Navy after 10 months of active service. The FSM was given an Other Than Honorable (OTH) discharge after the military discovered that the FSM fraudulently enlisted into the naval service (Article 83) and...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-01069

    Original file (ND01-01069.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Very Respectfully, Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 Copy of neuropsychological and vocational evaluation dated June 17, 2001 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: USNR (DEP) 861224 - 861229 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 861230 Date of Discharge: 890721 Length of Service...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00711

    Original file (ND03-00711.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-00711 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030324. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions. The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review.

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00487

    Original file (ND99-00487.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    No indication of appeal in the record.920708: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.920709: Applicant advised of his rights and having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to appear before an Administrative Discharge Board.920723: Applicant waived his right to an Administrative Discharge Board and representation at the board and to make a...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600954

    Original file (ND0600954.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Documentation In addition to the service and medical records, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant’s DD Form 214 (2)Character Reference ltr from J_ P_, Jr., Major General US Army (Retired), dated December 6, 2004 Nineteen pages from Applicant’s service record Supervisor’s Performance Planning Worksheet, dated May...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600303

    Original file (ND0600303.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). While the Board acknowledges the Applicant’s testimony, the Applicant failed to provide any post-service documentation for the Board to consider. 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 | ND99-00859

    Original file (ND99-00859.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND99-00859 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 990611, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. 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. In the applicant’s issue 5, the Board found that the applicant’s entire service record was taken into...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00021

    Original file (ND99-00021.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 the applicant’s issue 1, the Board found this issue to be without merit. In the applicant’s issues 2 and 3, the Board found these issues to be without merit. You may obtain a copy of DoD Directive 1332.28 by writing to: DA Military Review Boards Agency Management Information and Support Directorate Armed Forces...