Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00869
Original file (ND03-00869.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-SN, USN
Docket No. ND03-00869

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20030424. The Applicant requests 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 20040401. 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. “On November 19, 1998 I was discharged from the U.S. Navy with a General under Honorable Conditions Discharge. I am submitting this form in hopes of getting my discharge upgraded to an Honorable one so I may join the Naval Reserves. My discharge was based on one isolated incident in over 28 months of service but was emphasized by a personal conflict I was going through. While on deployment I placed a phone call back home and my fiancé informed me that she had been raped. At this time all I wanted to do was get home. We were still months from getting back into homeport so I had to deal with this on my own. I found myself not sleeping or eating. I was very short with my shipmates and became recluse. My division had been working roughly 19 hour day so not getting enough sleep eventually took it toll on me. During late night watch I feel asleep at my post and was sent to Captain’s Mast. I received 30 days restriction and 15 hours of Extra Military Instruction. At this point I went to talk to the ship’s Chaplain to see if he could help me at all. He recommended that I see a local psychiatrist in Bahrain. The psychiatrist there did not feel that I needed to be released from the Navy. I pushed the matter with the Chaplain because I thought it was a sure way home. My Captain at the time; Captain W___, was understanding about the situation but did not have a way to discharge me unless he put I under a derogatory situation. He based the discharge around the incident of me falling asleep on watch and I was given a general under honorable condition discharge and the narrative reason was misconduct. I was not thinking about the long term at that time; I just wanted to go home. It didn’t matter how. I do not blame the Navy for any of the actions that were taken. Quite the contrary, the Navy was very good to me and tried to help out any way they could. I do regret taking the general discharge simply because it means I can no longer enlist into the military. I miss the camaraderie I had with my shipmates and the genuine experiences you get by being in the Armed Forces. As you will see by my evaluations and other records I was an exemplary sailor until this incident. If given the chance I would like to prove I could be that type of sailor again. Thank you for your time and patience.”

 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):
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     960131 - 960609  COG
         Active: USN                        None

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 960610               Date of Discharge: 981119

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 02 05 10
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 21                          Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 52

 Highest Rate: SN

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: NMA                  Behavior: NMA             OTA: NMA

Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: AFEM, SSDR(2), NAVY”E”(2), GCA

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

 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 :

980903:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 113: On or about 0500, 980814, was found asleep as forward lookout.
         Award: Forfeiture of $100.00 pay per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 30 days, reduction in rate (suspended for 6 months). No indication of appeal in the record.
981001:  Psychological Evaluation indicates Applicant was diagnosed with a Personality Disorder NOS with Antisocial and Borderline Features. Recommendation: Member is fit for full duty. He is responsible for his behavior and should be held accountable for his actions. This individual does manifest a long standing disorder of character and behavior which is of such severity as to interfere with his serving adequately in the Navy.

981026:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge general under honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense and personality disorder.
981026:  Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights except the right to obtain copies of the documents used to support the basis for the separation.
981027:  Commanding Officer advised CHNAVPERS of Applicant’s discharge with a general under honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense. Commanding Officer’s comments: SN M____ lacks the potential for further productive naval service. Per enclosure (2), his psychiatric evaluation indicates he is incapable of serving adequately in the Navy and if kept in the Navy, he is a continuing danger to himself and others. However, I have based the characterization of his service on the serious offense as indicated in enclosure (3). This single discreditable incident was of such a serious nature that he put the entire crew of this ship in harms way by sleeping on watch as a lookout. The ship was in a condition three status, a heighten state of combat readiness due to the existence of real hostile threat. As such, his discharge will be characterized as General.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 19981119 with a general (under 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. The Applicant states his discharge was based on one isolated incident in 28 months of service. When a Sailor’s service has been honest and faithful, it is appropriate to characterize that service as honorable. Characterization of service as general (under honorable conditions) 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 the award of non-judicial punishment (NJP) for commission of a serious offense for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). An upgrade to honorable would be inappropriate. Relief, is therefore, denied.

The NDRB has no jurisdiction over reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Navy. Neither a less than fully honorable discharge nor an unfavorable "RE" code is, in itself, a bar to reenlistment. A request for a waiver is normally done only during the processing of a formal application for enlistment through a recruiter.

The following is provided for the edification of the applicant. 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 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.

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 documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments or any other evidence related to his discharge at that time. 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 18, effective
12 Dec 97 until 29 March 2000, Article 1910-142 [formerly 3630605]. SEPARATION 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 | 2004_Navy | ND04-00049

    Original file (ND04-00049.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the 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:None PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 970331 - 970721 COG Active: USN None Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 970722 Date of Discharge: 000629 Length...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01163

    Original file (ND03-01163.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-01163 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030626. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable or general under honorable conditions or entry level separation or uncharacterized and the reason for the discharge be changed to re-enlist. Any I honorably turned myself in paying my own way from Miami to Chicago, after being held at separation for a while until I went to Captain’s...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00273

    Original file (ND03-00273.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-00273 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 20021205, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions. CA action 010730: Sentence approved and ordered executed.010724: Applicant to confinement. 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.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00612

    Original file (ND04-00612.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The discharge shall remain: UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600. I was young and the recruiter made a deal with me, that cost me my life. Commanding Officer’s comments: SR F_ (Applicant) has been extremely inconsistent since reporting on board in April of last year.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00413

    Original file (ND03-00413.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    So I really don’t think misconduct is the reason for my separation that’s probably why my command doesn’t have a copy of my discharge package.” Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214. 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).The NDRB, under its...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00697

    Original file (ND03-00697.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. The Applicant can provide additional documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments or any other evidence related to the applicant’s discharge at that time. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00558

    Original file (ND03-00558.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of 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:Service related documents (4 pages) Letter from Applicant Poem from Applicant Letter from Department of Veterans Affairs Copies of DD Form 214 (2) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00716

    Original file (ND02-00716.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00716 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020425, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. I told her that I had my entire leave papers because I had to have Limited Duty at PSD sign me out for leave because there was no one at the command that had the authority to do so. (FSM) DD Form 293 Application for the Naval Discharge Review Board of Discharge or Dismissal from the Armed Forces of the United States...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00357

    Original file (ND01-00357.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00357 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010126, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. I wish you would change my discharge so it will make me feel better about myself, and for future jobs. Relief is not warranted.The applicant takes issue with being processed for wrongful use of controlled substance without a “piss test.” The Board found this issue without merit.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00441

    Original file (ND01-00441.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).In response to the applicant’s issue, to permit relief, an error or injustice must be found to have existed during the period of enlistment under review. There was nothing in the records, nor did the applicant provide any documentation, to indicate there existed an error of fact, law, procedure, or discretion at the...