All former Navy o with legal seperations experience (legal o for my ship/assited base jag on seps)
There are 7 classifications of discharge for officers
Dishonorable
Bad conduct
Dismissal (officers only)
other than honorable
honorable
General (under honorable conditions)
Uncharacterized
The first 3 DD/BCD/Dismissal can only be awarded at a court-martial. However, this did not need to be a trial jury as a Summary CM can be handled at a COs level if they are at the appropriate command level.
An OTH is not uncommon for those who have been in trouble. Administrative boards may be convened by any CO and must contain a minimum of 3 persons. They make 2 determinations: retain/not retain. If not retain, characterization of the discharge. For enlisted members the minimum senior officer was a LCDR (O-4) one member could be enlisted - and we normally chose this option for two reasons (they were harder and they understood the sailors situation better). I never saw an officer seperated via this method but it was possible. It would likely require a more senior officer to chair.
If he was seperated involuntarily via this method then it could have either Uncharacterized or General. It is very difficult to upgrade an OTH to an Honorable; however, I have seen Generals upgraded several times to Honorable after a few years of seperation. Have never heard of an Uncharacterized discharge being issued.
Having worked on about 100 admin discharges from 1991-1994, I would guess that he was subjected to an administrative board and received a general, or was subjected to a Summary CM and a Dismissal. If it was any type of CM then it should be open to FOIA requests as these are trials - just under UCMJ jurisdiction. Would start with his last command and work up through the command chain. If it was administrative in nature then this would be closed as part of his record, but command retention records (open to FOIA) may be able to piece together if any officers were released under other than normal means. In addition command logs may note convening of CMs if local - I know we had to note on the deck logs if convened onboard ship.
Given all this I would guess that the situation was likely handled administratively - tends to be quieter and is a LOT quicker. The review board convened later would be able to upgrade his characterization after reviewing. I see this as the most likely scenario.
Also I do not believe I ever received anything besides my DD214 - no special certificate or anything. The DD214 would be the official documentation. I was seperated for failure to promote - passed over twice (used to be 3 times) - no special documentation required for that they just notify you and that is it. My committement was 5 active, 3 reserve - which I extended beyond the min for reserve purposes. Again nothing special when they seperated me just notification and normal outprocessing.
Sorry for being so windy. Just my 2 cents.
USNA '89
LT (USN 89-94/USNR 94-01)
A officer punitive discharge is called a dismissal and has the same effect as a dishonorable discharge.
In any event, the evidence suggests Kerry was administratively, not punitively, discharged involuntarily. The reason for the action is not clear from the records. That seems to be what Kerry is hiding.
The time in question is during his reserve commitment between 1970 and 1972. He seperated honorably from Active Duty, but he didnt seperate from the reserves until the Carter Administration, even though his reserve commitment expired in 1972.
My opinion is he didnt attend the reqired amount of drills and a board was convened to involuntarily seperate him.
is this possible? I know reserve personnel matters are different than Active matters.
J/M
USN vet
1978-1987
Could you please tell us what your reserve obligation entailed, regarding showing up for duty somewhere.
If Kerry's obligation was for 3 years active and 3 years reserve, his duty might have been similar to yours.
I believe that he did not attend any reserve meetings while he was active with the VVAW and I have yet to read an explanation for why not, especially since the Dem attack on President Bush has been his supposed lack of attendance at meetings in 72/73.
Thanks