Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500342
Original file (ND0500342.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-MA3, USNR
Docket No. ND05-00342

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20041216. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The Applicant requests a documentary record review. The Applicant did not list any representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20050713. 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: GENERAL (UNDER 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. “Prior to my deployment to Kuwait, I was informed by my sister about my father possibly being missing. Our family house was sold quickly and my father went on a trip to Brazil and didn’t return. I had no way to make contact with my father and thought my mother attempted suicide and threatened all the family members with death.

The stress was overwhelming and clouded my judgment, while I was deployed. During my out processing, I was finally able to make contact with my father. My father too was afraid of his situation in Brazil, though he was well. By the time I received the information about my father it was too late to stay in service.

I would welcome the opportunity to again be allowed back into the military (RE Code adjustment and Honorable Discharge). Though my action during this personal troubling time might have caused Irreparable damage to my military career.”

 Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Applicant’s DD Form 214 (2)
E-mail dated January 30, 2003 (2)
Memorandum, performance report on Applicant, dated February 5, 2003 (2)
Certificate of Appreciation from Department of Homeland Security
Certificate of Recognition for dedication and performance dated August 18, 2004
Letter to Applicant from Program Manager, dated September 27, 2003
E-mail, dated November 18, 2004 (3 pages)
E-mail, dated November 19, 2004 (2 pages)
News Article, 13 Arrested in Joint Terrorism Task Force Raid , dated November 18, 2004 (2 pages)

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE
Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: Unknown
         Active: USMC              Unknown - Unknown                 HON

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: Unknown     Date of Discharge: 20030317

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 00 03 13
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: Unknown            Years Contracted: Unknown

 Education Level: Unknown                  AFQT: Unknown

 Highest Rate: MA2

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):
Performance: NMF*                 Behavior: NMF             OTA: NMF

Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: Rifle Sharpshooter Ribbon, Pistol Marksmanship Ribbon, SSDR, OSR, NDSM (2)

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

*No marks were found in service record.
 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 :

20030317:        DD Form 214: Applicant discharged general (under honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense, 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 20030317 with a general (under honorable conditions) for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (A). After a thorough review of the available records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper and equitable (B and C). The presumption of regularity of governmental affairs was applied by the Board in this case in the absence of a complete discharge package and missing elements of the summary of service (D).

Issue 1. Normally, to permit relief, an impropriety or inequity must have existed during the period of enlistment in question. No such impropriety or inequity is evident during the Applicant’s enlistment. In the absence of a complete discharge package or service record, the Board presumes the Applicant committed a serious offense, was properly notified and processed by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense and that a general (under honorable conditions) was an appropriate characterization of his service. The Applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption of regularity through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support his issue. The Applicant has submitted no documentation or other evidence to rebut the above presumption that he committed misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense and his service merited a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, the Board presumes that the Applicant’s discharge was both proper and equitable. Relief denied.

 Since the NDRB has no jurisdiction over reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Navy, Marine Corps, or any other of the Armed Forces, NDRB is not authorized to change a reenlistment code. An unfavorable “RE” code is, in itself, not a bar to reenlistment. A request for a waiver can be submitted during the processing of a formal application for reenlistment through a recruiter. Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) can make changes to reenlistment codes.

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. 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), re-issued October 2002, effective 22 Aug 02 until Present, Article 1910-142 [formerly 3630605]. SEPARATION 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 V, Para 502, Propriety .

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



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 | 2004_Navy | ND04-01456

    Original file (ND04-01456.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Award: Administrative separation.980928: DD Form 214: Applicant discharged with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense, 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-01466

    Original file (ND04-01466.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant’s DD Form 214 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 980616 - 990614 COG Active: None Period of Service Under Review...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500478

    Original file (ND0500478.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge changed to general/under honorable conditions. In the acknowledgement letter, the Applicant was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing. As of this time, the Applicant has not provided documentation for the Board to consider.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00456

    Original file (ND02-00456.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00456 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020225, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. On May 4 th I was informed that I was not going to be transferred and that all request where denied.My dad's condition was serious so I took the matter upon myself to leave my duty station on May 6 th 2000 and return home to provide care for my father. I received a General Discharge (under honorable conditions) and...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00954

    Original file (ND99-00954.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 980602 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (A). The applicant’s first issue states “My undesirable discharge was inequitable because I came forth with the problem to seek help with the military and to try to stay in the military.” The NDRB found no evidence in the applicant’s service record to support this issue. You should read...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00065

    Original file (ND03-00065.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. 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.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01398

    Original file (ND03-01398.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable, general/under honorable conditions, entry level separation and uncharacterized. “My name is J_ M. R_ (Applicant). ]990517: DD Form 214: Applicant discharged under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-142.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500053

    Original file (ND0500053.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Character, Narrative Reason, and Authority of Discharge (at time of issuance):GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-142 (formerly 3630605). Bill educational benefits, not the Naval Discharge Review Board.

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00412

    Original file (ND99-00412.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MMFN (applicant) has no potential for further service. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 980423 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (A). Although the Board respects and appreciates the applicant’s over four years of service, the seriousness of the above offense is such that the Board found the characterization of the applicant’s discharge as Other Than Honorable...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-01299

    Original file (ND04-01299.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to entry level separation and the reason for the discharge be changed to “mislead by recruiter.” The Applicant requests a personal appearance discharge review before a traveling panel closest to Houston or Galveston, TX. The NDRB also advised that the board first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing. The summary of service clearly documents that commission...