Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00395
Original file (ND03-00395.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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




ex-EMFR, USN
Docket No. ND03-00395

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20030109. The Applicant requests that 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 20031215. 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. The following issues are the reasons I believe my discharge should be upgraded to Honorable. If you disagree, please explain in detail why you disagree. I am aware that at the time of my discharge I was in the wrong as far as being a homosexual. Under the current standards, I would not receive the type of discharge I did. Since my discharge, I have been a good citizen and have completed an AS degree in Electronics Technology, I am also attending school at the present time to get my Bachelor’s degree in Project Management.

When I was in the military I was very young minded and was very scared when the investigation came into full swing. I had never been in any trouble and had no idea of how to react to the investigation. I admit that I lied when asked if I was a homosexual but this is because I myself was confused. Also, my parent had no idea of my sexuality and I had no idea of how I was going to tell them why I was being discharged. When I originally enlisted in the military I had every intention of retiring, so when it was being taken away from me I panicked.

I hope that you can understand where I am coming from and feel that I deserve an Honorable discharge.

Thank you very much for your time in this matter”

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)     881217 - 891203  COG
         Active: USN                        None

Period of Service Under Review :

Date of Enlistment: 891204               Date of Discharge: 910109

Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 01 01 06
         Inactive: None

Age at Entry: 23                          Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 47

Highest Rate: EMFR

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Performance: 2.80 (1)    Behavior: 2.80 (1)                OTA : NOB

Military Decorations: None

Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: None

Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

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 :

901101:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Between 900301 to 900331, fail to obey a lawful order by wrongfully having sexual relations in BEQ 531, room 352, with another military member; violation of UCMJ, Article 134: (2 Specs), between 900301 to 900331. Spec 1: Wrongfully commit indecent acts with a civilian female; Spec 2: Make a false official statement regarding acknowledgement of waiver of rights.
         Award: Forfeiture of $362.00 pay per month for 2 months, restriction to NTC for 45 days, extra duty for 45 days. No indication of appeal in the record.

901203:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of homosexuality due to your statement that you are a homosexual and due to engaging in, attempting to engage and soliciting another to engage in a homosexual act or acts as evidenced by your statement of 900914 and misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense evidenced by your Commanding Officer’s Nonjudicial Punishment of 901101.

901203:  Applicant advised of her rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights.

901212:  Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of homosexuality due to having stated that she is a homosexual and due to engaging in, attempting to engage and soliciting another to engage in a homosexual act or acts and misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.

901228:  CNMPC 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 19910109 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.
A characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions is warranted when the member's conduct constitutes a significant departure from that expected of a sailor. The Applicant’s violations of Article 92 and Article 134 of the UCMJ are considered serious offenses and could have resulted in trial by a special court-martial. The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of her service, reflects her disobedience of the orders and directives which regulate good order and discipline in the naval service, and falls short of that required to warrant a change to her characterization of service. The Board found that under current standards, the Applicant could have received the same characterization of service for the serious offenses she committed. The evidence of record does not demonstrate that the Applicant was not responsible for her conduct or that she should not be held accountable for her actions. Relief denied.

The Applicant’s discharge characterization accurately reflects her service to her country. The discharge was proper and equitable.
Normally, to permit relief, an error or inequity must have existed during the period of enlistment in question. No such error or inequity is evident during the Applicant’s enlistment. Additionally, 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. Relief not warranted.

The Applicant is reminded that she remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received at the NDRB within 15 years from the date of her 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 15560A), Change 8, effective
21 Aug 89 until 14 Aug 91, Article 3630600, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL BY REASON OF MISCONDUCT – COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE.

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 | 1999_Navy | ND99-01077

    Original file (ND99-01077.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I would like to ask the review to change discharge to honorable. 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).In the applicant’s issue 1, the Board found that the applicant had 3 NJPs within one year and seven months of service. Specifically, he was briefed that an Honorable discharge after completion of 36 months on active duty would be required for...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500023

    Original file (ND0500023.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    _______________________________________________________________________ In accordance with Title 32, CFR, Section 724.116 and SECNAVINST 5420.174D, Part I, Paragraph 1.20, The American Legion submits to the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB or Board) the above issue and following statement in supplement to this Applicant’s petition.Review of the available records reflect that this former member earned the NDSM and SSDR. Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00625

    Original file (ND00-00625.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00625 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000417, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to General/under Honorable conditions. The Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) also advised that the board first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing. The applicant must petition the Board of Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) to change her reenlistment code issue.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00163

    Original file (ND01-00163.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00163 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 001121, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. Specification 2: Unauthorized absence 0730, 12Jul90 to 0730, 13Jul90 (1 day). Accordingly, I recommend administrative separation under other than honorable conditions.920106: BUPERS directed the applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600015

    Original file (ND0600015.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). As of this time, the Applicant has not provided any post-service documentation for the Board to consider. The NDRB has no authority to provided additional review of this case since Applicant’s discharge occurred more than 15 years ago.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-01110

    Original file (ND02-01110.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-01110 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020807, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :940414: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86 Unauthorized absence from 0530, 931224 until 0600, 940104 (10 days/surrendered) Award: Forfeiture of $466 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to EMFR. No indication of appeal in the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00673

    Original file (ND99-00673.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND99-00673 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 990416, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to General/under Honorable conditions. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: USNR (DEP) 891220 -...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01034

    Original file (ND03-01034.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Charge II: violation of the UCMJ, Article 89 (2 specs): Specification 1: Disrespect toward a superior commissioned officer on 930119. It must be noted that most Sailors serve honorably and well and therefore earn honorable discharges.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00873

    Original file (ND03-00873.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-00873 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030424. 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, however, 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00332

    Original file (ND02-00332.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Please change my discharge reason to show "End of Required Active Duty" and My Reenlistment Code to an RE-1. Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events : 900414: Civil Conviction for violation of VC 23152 (A) Driving Under the Influence.Sentence: Found guilty of driving under the influence. Issue 2: The Applicant requested that the basis for his discharge be changed to "End of Required Active Duty."