Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-01262
Original file (ND02-01262.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-SR, USNR
Docket No. ND02-01262

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 020903, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. The Applicant requested 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 030619. 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. The Board’s vote was unanimous that the character of the discharge shall not change. The discharge shall remain: GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/CONDITION, NOT A DISABILITY, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3620200.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as submitted

1. I have not had any problems with the law for over two years after my discharge. I am holding a good job. When I was being discharged I was told that if I kept out of trouble that my discharge could/would be changed to an Honorable.

 Documentation
Only the service and medical records were reviewed, as the Applicant did not provide additional documentation for the Board to consider.

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: 940405               Date of Discharge: 960311

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 01 10 03
         Inactive: 00 01 04

 Age at Entry: 23                          Years Contracted: 8

 Education Level: 12½               AFQT: 37

 Highest Rate: SA

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: NMF*        Behavior: NMF             OTA: NMF

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

*No Marks Found in service record.

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

GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/CONDITION, NOT A DISABILITY, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3620200.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

960129:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Failure to obey a lawful regulation.
         Award: Forfeiture of $150 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to E-1. No indication of appeal in the record.
960129:  Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (violation of UCMJ, Article 92 – failure to obey an lawful regulation), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.
960216:  Medical Evaluation (Lafayette River Mental Health Clinic: This 25 year old divorced white male with no previous psychiatric history, was evaluated at LRMHC for enuresis.
         MSE: He was appropriately dressed in the uniform of the day. He was not in acute distress. His mood was euthymic with full affect. His speech was normal. He denied hallucinations. His though process was logical without evidence of obsession or delusions. He was alert oriented. His memory was [sic] intact and his concentration was adequate. His abstraction was intact. He was estimated to be of average intelligent AFQT 37. His insight and judgment was fair. He denied suicidal/homicidal ideation, plan, or interest.
         DIAGNOSIS: AXIS I: Secondary Enuresis Nocturnal type.
                  AXIS II: No Diagnosis
                  AXIS III: Enuresis
         PLAN: 1) The evaluating psychologist advises administrative separation at the convenience of the Government for unsuitability on the bases of the enuresis diagnosis. See MILPERSMAN 3620200.
         2) The member is not depressed, suicidal, or homicidal.
         3) He is not interested in treatment and wants to be discharged from the USN. If retained, his condition is likely to present a burden to the command.
         4) Plan discussed with Pt who understands.
         5) No follow-up indicated or desired by Pt.
         6) POC Dr. J_, xxx-xxxx.

960306:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge general (under honorable conditions) by reason of convenience of the government on the basis of enuresis as evidenced by being diagnosed with enuresis which renders you unsuitable for naval service.
960306:          Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights.
990313:  Commanding Officer, USS THOMAS S GATES (CG 51), advised BUPERS of Applicant’s discharge with a general (under honorable conditions) by reason of convenience of the government on the basis of a physical or mental conditions not necessarily amounting to disability but affecting potential for continued active duty in the naval service as evidenced by diagnosis of enuresis.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 960311 with a characterization of general (under honorable conditions) for convenience of the government due to a physical or mental condition, not a disability - enuresis. (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: In the Applicant’s case, the Board could discern no impropriety or inequity and therefore considered the Applicant’s discharge proper and equitable. A characterization of service of general (under honorable) conditions is warranted when the service member’s conduct constitutes a departure from that expected of a Sailor. The record is void of any evidence that the Applicant was not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions. The Applicant’s service record is marred by award of non-judicial punishment (NJP) for failure to obey a lawful regulation thus substantiating the characterization awarded. An upgrade to honorable would be inappropriate. Relief denied. However, the NDRB did note an administrative error on the original DD Form 214. The Applicant was not discharged for a personality disorder and the Board corrected it to change the narrative reason for separation. The discharge shall be corrected to: GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/CONDITION, NOT A DISABILITY.

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. However, the NDRB is authorized to consider outstanding post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge, to the extent that such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the Applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review. 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. Evidence of continuing educational pursuits, a positive employment record, documentation of community service, and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities, are examples of verifiable documents that should be provided to receive consideration for relief, based on post-service conduct. At this time, the Applicant did not provided any verifiable documentation of good character and conduct to mitigate his misconduct while on active duty. Relief denied.

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. Representation at a personal appearance hearing is recommended but not required.


 Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

 A. The Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C, Change 13, effective 960624 - 961002), Article 3620200, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL BY REASON OF CONVENIENCE OF THE GOVERNMENT .

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 | 2001_Navy | ND01-01137

    Original file (ND01-01137.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 (2 copies) Separation Authority dtd Jul 7, 1999 Separation Notification and Statement of Awareness dtd 6 Jul 1999 Recruit Mental Health Evaluation dtd 1 Jul 1999 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: USNR (DEP) 980828 - 990623 COG Period of Service Under Review...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00044

    Original file (ND02-00044.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00044 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 011004, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. Axis II: Paranoid features noted.971002: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge general (under honorable conditions) by reason of convenience of the government due physical or mental conditions not necessarily amounting to disability but affecting potential for continued active duty in the naval...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-01068

    Original file (ND01-01068.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).The applicant’s issue states: “Respectfully request this change (reason for discharge) because the DD Form 214 is a record of public knowledge and my DD 214 contains "Personality Disorder" as the reason for discharge. I appreciate the board taking time to review this application.” The NDRB, under its responsibility...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00646

    Original file (ND01-00646.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I was discharged in 92 for sleepwalking. I know that if you sleepwalk you will be discharged from the Navy. Documentation Only the service and medical records were reviewed, as the applicant did not provide additional documentation for the Board to consider.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00650

    Original file (ND01-00650.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Pt will be referred to Legal for admin separation for a Sleepwalking Disorder. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper but inequitable (C and D).The Board carefully reviewed the applicant’s service record, issues, and additional documentation and found the applicant’s service warranted characterization as honorable. The applicant’s record had no adverse information, and the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00451

    Original file (ND99-00451.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    4 - patient is judged sane, able to tell right from wrong and to adhere to the right, and to assist capably and adequately in his own defense.960614: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge, type warranted by service record, or the least favorable characterization of general (under honorable conditions) by reason of convenience of the government due to personality disorder as evidenced by diagnosis by competent military medical authority which concluded that the medical...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00042

    Original file (ND00-00042.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00042 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 991014, requested that the reason for the discharge be changed to Secretarial Authority. Member did not object to the separation.930715: CO, RTC, Great Lakes directed the applicant's discharge with an Entry Level Separation by reason of Convenience of the government on the basis of a Personality Disorder in accordance with NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3620200. After a thorough review of the records, supporting...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00762

    Original file (ND02-00762.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    SR arrived at RTC on March 15, 1999 and was referred because SR stated that he was depressed and appeared unmotivated. SR is suitable to report to Separations Division.990401: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with the least favorable characterization of service possible as General (Under Honorable Conditions) by reason of convenience of the Government due to physical or mental conditions as evidenced by a depressive disorder under MILPERMSAN...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-01105

    Original file (ND04-01105.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant states, “My discharge was inequitable because it was based on actions and/or behavior of the recruiting officer, and not solely on my behavior and/or actions while enlisted in the U.S. Navy.” The Applicant was discharged for a condition not a disability as a result of his diagnosis by competent medical authority. Normally, to permit relief, a procedural impropriety or inequity must have occurred during the discharge process for the period of enlistment in question. As of this...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-01217

    Original file (ND99-01217.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Block 28, Narrative Reason for Separation, should read: “CONDITION, NOT A DISABILITY” vice “OTHER DESIGNATED PHYSICAL CONDITION”. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 971211 with an uncharacterized service for convenience of the Government due to condition, not a disability (A). After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge...