Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600277

Original file (ND0600277.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

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

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

ex-SK2, USN
Docket No. ND06-00277

Applicant ’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 200 5 1125 . The Applicant requests the Discharge 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. The Applicant did not designate a representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20061012 . 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 in lieu of a trial by court-martial .

PART I -
APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

Applicant ’s issues, as stated on the application and/or attached document/letter:

“ I have been diagnosed with PTSD and schizophrenia and severe depression and it was determined by Dr. S_ at VAMC West L.A. was service connected and that the illness began while I was in the military in the Persian Gulf.

Dear Naval Council,

My name is L _ A _ R _ and I am a Navy veteran. I enlisted right out of high school in the delayed entry program in 1990. I began active duty in June 26, 1991. I served two enlistments, one an honorable and the other is an O. T .H. I realized in 1994 that I was not mentally the sound as others. I have problems with delusions and illusions of many different things (sometimes very painful). I and my doctor at the V.A. in West Los Angeles believe that I was possibly exposed to something in the Persian Gulf while on West Pac. I went on West Pac on two different occasions while on my first enlistment. I truly hope that you will review my documentation and my medical files at the Veterans Administration in West Los Angeles via internet or any other method that is available to you. I have a strong patriotic spirit and I have a great deal of respect for the military way of life. I wish I could have made a career, my dream was to become a naval officer and serve on a car rier, I always had the idea that nothing was impossible while I was in the service (it was in the air, I could breathe it,) but I realize that maybe my mental condition would have prevented it, those are really big shoes and not everyone has what it takes. I never saw as many opportunities for career and personal growth as I did while in the U.S. Navy. I admire all the branches of the Defense Department and know that all the services are the apex at their specialty. Please consider my application for review of discharge as I stand ready at all times if called, to defend my country to the best of my ability and training. The attached is all the documentation that I have at this time. I cannot afford to pay an attorney nor do I know any that specializes in dealing with the military. I know that the V.A. provides people to help you fill out the application, but I feel that I can do that on my own. If there is anything else that I can do please contact me at phone#,s (telephone numbers deleted) . My e-mail is (e-mail address deleted) and my address is on the application itself. I will provide anything else that might help me get my discharge upgraded. ”

Documentation

In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant , was considered:

Applicant ’ prescription label for Risperidone, dtd October 18, 2005
Applicant ’s After Care instructions, undtd

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):

         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     19900808 - 19910625       COG
         Active: USN      19910626 - 19940924       HON
         Inactive:        USN (DEP)        19950224 - 19950409      COG

Period of Service Under Review :

Date of Enlistment: 19950410              Date of Discharge: 20011031

Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 0 6 0 6 22 (Does not exclude lost time)
         Inactive: None

Time Lost During This Period (days):

         Unauthorized absence: 1887 day s
         Confinement:              3 6 days

Age at Entry: 22

Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 12                                 AFQT: 58

Highest Rate: SK2

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance: 3 .0 ( 1 )      Behavior: 3 .0 ( 1 )                  OTA : 3 . 29        5.0 Scale
                  4.0 (1) 3.8 (1) 4.00   4.0 Scale

Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, (as listed on the DD Form 214): Navy “E” Ribbon, Na tional Defense Service Medal, Southwest Asia Service Medal (2ND), Sea Service Deployment Ribbon

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/ IN LIEU OF TRIAL BY COURT MARTIAL, authority: MILPERSMAN, Article 1910-106 (formerly 3630650) .

Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

950410 : Reenlisted this date for a term of 4 years.

960 711 : Applicant to unauthorized absence at 0945 on 960711 .

960810: Applicant declared a deserter.

010910 : Applicant from unauthorized absence on 010910 ( 1887 days/apprehended).

010910: Applicant to pretrial confinement.

011001: Charges preferred for violation of the UCMJ, Article 86. Specification : In that Store Keeper L_ A. R_ (Applicant), U.S. Navy, Navy Region Southwest Transient Personnel Unit, on active duty, did, on or about 10 August 1996, without authority, absent himself from his unit, to wit: USS KINKAID (DD 965), located at San Diego, California, and did remain so absent until he was apprehended on or about 10 September 2001.

011010 : Applicant requested an administrative discharge under other than honorable conditions in lieu of a trial by court-martial. He consulted with counsel and was fully advised of the implications of his request. The Applicant stated he understood the elements of the offense with which he was charged, and admitted he was guilty of violating UCMJ, Article 86. The Applicant stated he was completely satisfied with the counsel he had received. The Applicant understood that if discharged under other than honorable conditions, it might deprive him of virtually all veterans' benefits based upon his current enlistment, and that he might expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life in situations wherein the type of service rendered or the character of discharge received therefrom may have a bearing.

011015: Charges withdrawn and dismissed without prejudice.

011015: Applicant from confinement.

011015 : The Commanding Officer, exercising GCMCA, approved the request for an administrative separation in lieu of a trial by court-martial, and directed Applicant ’s discharge.

011026: DD Form 2807-1, Block 30, Examiner’s Summary and Elaboration of all pertinent data : “ Pt admits to occasional depression symptoms. No suicidal/homicidal ideation. Not depressed at this time - does not required counseling. ” Evaluated by F_ J. A_, MD.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 20011031 in lieu of a trial by court-martial (A and B) with a service characterization of under other than 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).

An under other than honorable conditions discharge is warranted when significant negative aspects of a member’s conduct or performance of duty outweigh the positive aspects of the member’s military record. The Applicant’s service was marred by a period of unauthorized absence that exceeded five years. The Applicant’s unauthorized absence is a violation of Article 86 of the UCMJ and the commission of a serious offense. The Applicant’s misconduct was punishable by punitive discharge if awarded upon conviction at a special or general court-martial. The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, reflects his willful failure to meet the requirements of his contract with the U.S. Navy and falls far short of that required for an upgrade of his characterization of service. Relief is not warranted.

The Applicant contends that his discharge should be changed because he has been diagnosed with PTSD and schizophrenia and that his medical condition has been determined to be service related. The Applicant further implies that his discharge should be changed because in 1994 he realized he “was not mentally [as] sound as others.” While he may feel that his medical condition 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. In a signed statement, the Applicant requested an administrative discharge under other than honorable conditions in lieu of a trial by court-martial. He consulted with counsel and was fully advised of the implications of his request. The Applicant understood that if discharged under other than honorable conditions, it might deprive him of virtually all veterans' benefits based upon his current enlistment, and that he might expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life in situations wherein the type of service rendered or the character of discharge received therefrom may have a bearing. The Applicant stated he understood the elements of the offenses with which he was charged. Relief is not warranted.

The following is provided for the edification of the Applicant. Normally, to permit relief, a procedural impropriety or inequity must have occurred during the discharge process for the period of enlistment in question. The Board discovered no impropriety after a review of Applicant’s case. 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 Naval service. The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge to the extent such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the Applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review. Examples of documentation that should be provided to the Board include proof of educational pursuits, verifiable employment records, documentation of community service and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities. As of this time, the Applicant has not provided any relevant post-service documentation for the Board to consider. Relief on this basis would be inappropriate.

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), Change 29, effective
11 Jul 2000 until 21 Aug 2002, Article 1910-106 (formerly 3630650), SEPARATION IN LIEU OF TRIAL BY COURT-MARTIAL.

B. A punitive bad conduct discharge may be adjudged for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Article 86, unauthorized absence for a period more than 30 days , upon conviction by a Special or General Court-Martial, in accordance wit h the Manual for Courts-Martial .

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 | 2005_Navy | ND0500655

Original file (ND0500655.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ND05-00655 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20050304. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). The Veterans Administration determines eligibility for post-service benefits not the Naval Discharge Review Board.
NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-01013

Original file (ND02-01013.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ND02-01013 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020711, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. 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 | 2005_Navy | ND0501207

Original file (ND0501207.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 record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant’s DD Form 214 Applicant’s DD Form 214 from the Army Letter to Applicant from Review Board Agency, dtd June 29, 2005 Letter to Army Review Board Agency from North Carolina Department of Administration, dtd May 31, 2005 Character...
NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600115

Original file (ND0600115.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). After this time we were getting ready to ship out on the 2 nd West Pac. At this time, the Applicant has not provided sufficient documentation of post service character and conduct to mitigate the misconduct that resulted in the characterization of discharge.
NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00787

Original file (ND01-00787.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ND01-00787 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010521, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, NDRB discerned no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the applicant’s service. 900511: Charges preferred to special court-martial for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ)...
NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501132

Original file (ND0501132.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ND05-01132 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20050629. The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The Applicant states that his record of service included good evaluations, awards and decorations, and that he had combat service.
NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00823

Original file (ND00-00823.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

I was never taken to DAPA or anyone else in my command about my drinking. I would be UA for days at a time, and chief would come by and tell me to come to work tomorrow. 941123: Pre-trial confinement.950201: Special Court Martial Charge I: violation of the UCMJ, Article 86, 3 Specifications: unauthorized absence (940928 - 941027 (29 days/S)) (941031 - 941126 (15 days/S)) and (941115 - 941122 (7 days/S)) (Totaling 51 days).
NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500432

Original file (ND0500432.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ND05-00432 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20050112. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). 030905: Applicant to unauthorized absence 2359, 030905.031118: Applicant apprehended by civilian authorities at 0155, 031105 for unauthorized absence and returned to military control 1130, 031118 (61 days/apprehended).031120: Court-Martial charges preferred...
NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500426

Original file (ND0500426.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ND05-00426 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20050118. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. 030527: Charges preferred for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) Article 86 (3 specs): (1) Unauthorized absence from 020313 to 030128, (2) Unauthorized absence from 030225-030317, (3) Unauthorized absence from 030320 to 030419. requested an administrative...
USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0500031

Original file (MD0500031.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant requested the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Documentation The Applicant did not provide any additional documentation for the Board to review. The Applicant admitted guilt to the following violations of the UCMJ, Article 86: unauthorized absence, from 4 May 1991 until apprehended on 26 November 1991.920207: GCMCA [Base Commander, Marine Corps Base, Camp Lejeune] determined that Applicant had no potential for further...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600277

Similar Decisions