Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00876
Original file (ND03-00876.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-LISR, USN
Docket No. ND03-00876

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20030422. 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: UNDER OTHER THAN 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. “Upon completion of High School, I decided to try the work force. Getting a job at Federal Express (FEDEX) allowed me time to think about what I wanted to accomplish in the future. After six months of employment there I decided to join the United States Navy. I felt this was the best path for me to take for various reasons. The military proved to be challenging, but I overcame those challenges. Entering into the Navy as an E-2 in March of 2001 and making E4 by March of 2002, I achieved and excelled beyond many of my personal expectations. Although onboard the USS Frank Cable at least every other week someone was being discharged from the Navy, or females were getting pregnant to leave the command everything was looking brighter for my future until the 21st of September 2002.

On this date I celebrated a friend’s birthday In doing so I also broke the midnight curfew imposed upon all E-4 and below. The celebration took place at a night club in Yokohama, Japan. We were there for few hours when we decide to leave. Enroute to the Yokosuka Naval Base we got in an accident. And accident which proved to be fatal for the driver, a very close friend of mine. Throughout the entire accident I was in the front passenger seat tight next to him. The rest of the day was very chaotic. From being questioned by Japanese authorities, to Yokosuka Base authorities, to the Master-at-Arms as well as Doctors onboard my ship.

I was sent to a counselor who worked at the Fleet and Family service center in Yokosuka, Japan Because my ship was getting underway in a few days she referred me for more counseling upon arrival in Guam. While underway I was put on restriction. And I never received further counseling. Throughout these days I didn’t have the time to come to terms with losing my fiend, and I began to lose respect for the higher in rank on board my ship. I couldn’t speak with my family as freely as I would have liked to. I withdrew from just about everything Finally the day came for me to get off restriction and a few of my friends from the ship wanted to take me out to have a little bit of fun. We went and ate dinner then they decided we would go to a night club. At about 2330 to 2340 we departed the club. When we got to the parking lot the driver realized she locked her keys in the car. So we culled another friend of ours to pick us up. At the same time she parked her car, liberty patrol was right behind her. It happened to be past midnight, again. For this offence they took my third class ranking.

After this incident took place I decided to get a vehicle of my own I moved in with a few friends and my vehicle was to travel to and from work. Occasionally going to the mall or the movies. Then on a Thursday I borrowed money from a friend promising I would return it on Friday. I forgot that I had duty that day. I went to the batik that day, and was considered U/A. For this offence I was again put on restriction us well as seperated from the Navy. I take full responsibility for the punishments awarded to me with the exception of being discharged front the military

I joined the military with aspirations of excelling in the United States Navy. If given another chance in the military I know I would exceed beyond many if not all of my expectations. I have not lost any respect for the United States Navy nor anything it teaches us to believe in. I would very much like another chance to proudly serve my country. Because the USS Fank Cable failed to render the proper treatment requested by myself and the counselor at the Fleet and Family Service Center, I would like to be granted my E-4 ranking back or u least E-2 which is the rank I originally began with so that I may continue in the career I wished for.”
Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Applicant’s DD Form 214
VA Form 21-22

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     010208 - 010312  COG
         Active: None

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 010313               Date of Discharge: 030214

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 01 11 02
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 28                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: Unknown

 Highest Rate: LI3

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):
Performance: 2.67 (3)    Behavior: 2.33 (3)                OTA: 2.61

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM, SSDR, N&MCOSR, NER (2)

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910-142 (formerly 3630605).

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

021002:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Failure to obey lawful written order.
         Award: Forfeiture of $722 per month for 1 month, restriction and extra duty for 30 days, reduction to LISN. Reduction suspended for 6 months. No indication of appeal in the record.
021002:  Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (Failure to obey other lawful written order. This is unacceptable. If you continue to engage in misconduct, your service record may reflect misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct as described in MILPERSMAN 1910-140.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.
        
021102:  Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (Failure to obey lawful general order by violation of Commander, Seventh Fleet Liberty Policy. This is unacceptable. If you continue to engage in misconduct, your service record may reflect misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct as described in MILPERSMAN 1910-140.), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.
        
021106:  Vacate suspended reduction to LISN awarded at CO’s NJP dated 021002.

030108:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86 (3 specs): Leaving place of duty and failing to go to appointed place of duty, violation of UCMJ, Article 107: False official statement.
         Award: Forfeiture of $645 per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to LISA. No indication of appeal in the record.
030108:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.
030108:  Applicant advised of rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all rights.
030119:  Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.

030110:  Commander Submarine Force, U.S. Pacific Fleet 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 20030214 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 service was marred by award of nonjudicial punishments (NJP’S) on two separate occasions, and adverse counseling entries on other occasions. Additionally, there is no evidence the Applicant was denied counseling or that this contributed/explained her misconduct. The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his 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 for an honorable characterization of service. An upgrade to honorable would be inappropriate. It must be noted that most Sailors serve honorably and well and therefore earn honorable discharges. In fairness to those Sailors, commanders and separation authorities are tasked to ensure that undeserving Sailors receive no higher characterization than is due. Relief denied.

The NDRB has no authority to change reenlistment codes or make recommendations to permit reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Naval Service or any other branch of the Armed Forces. An unfavorable “RE” code is, in itself, not a bar to reenlistment. A request for a waiver can be submitted during the processing of a formal application for reenlistment through a recruiter. Additionally, the Board can authorize a restoration of pay grade. Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) can make changes to reenlistment codes and restore a pay grade.

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 her 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), re-issued October 2002, effective 22 Aug 02 until Present, 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 | 2002_Navy | ND02-00884

    Original file (ND02-00884.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00884 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020605, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. I would be in charge of the Bravo working party. When I was discharged, I returned to Tennessee and started my life over as I had intended.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00940

    Original file (ND01-00940.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A FEW MONTHS EARLIER I WAS SENT TO A ALCOHOL REHAB CENTER FOR ANOTHER ONE OF MY MISTAKES THAT HAPPEND IN AUSTRALIA. The Board considered the applicant’s service record and found the Other Than Honorable discharge proper and equitable. The applicant’s service record shows three NJP’s and appropriate counsel and warnings were issued.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00338

    Original file (ND04-00338.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    “I am requesting my discharge be changed from General(Under Honorable Conditions) to Honorable.My contention is that I was given this discharge without evidence to support the charges. I didn’t know to ask to see what evidence was used against me. Relief denied.Issue 2: In Applicant’s second issue, he claims his discharge was inequitable because he had never been in trouble or to nonjudicial punishment before and he had been a good sailor looking to continue his service.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00665

    Original file (ND04-00665.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND04-00665 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20040317. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. After we were sent back to home port in Japan, it all started again, so after being at Sea for 4 months we wanted to celebrate.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00841

    Original file (ND02-00841.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00841 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020529, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. I was told by navy legal office on Guam that an admin board was to be pick at random, but the Capt pick the board himself, I was also told that one member of my board was suppose to be from another command so as to be impartial this was not done everyone on my board was from my command. The possibility that one of his...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00673

    Original file (ND02-00673.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    SR D_ T_ presented a written statement, which I reviewed while in legal, which told of how she had overheard these girls talking about how they were going to "get me" and other things, but her statement was not even taken into account, nor was she present at the mast in front of LCDR C_. 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,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00343

    Original file (ND01-00343.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    As I previously mentioned the Carl Vinson was having major drug problems and lot sailors were being busted for drugs it was during this time that several of my roommates close friends were busted for drug abuse and put on restriction. We then called in my roommates in and they were asked about three questions in which they denied any involment and then they were dismissed they then called the two friends of my roommates and they both testified under oath about what my roommates had told...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00996

    Original file (ND03-00996.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-RM3, USN Docket No. ND03-00996 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030521. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01250

    Original file (ND03-01250.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. I then decided to extend my tour of duty for another two years to NALF San Clemente, which was the closest duty station to San Diego where I decided to complete my schooling. Not too long after I arrived in San Diego we found out that Alma was pregnant, but three months after, she called again with a bad news, she had a miscarriage.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01383

    Original file (ND03-01383.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-01383 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030819. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions. (f) (1).As the representative, we ask that consideration be given to equitable relief, as this is a matter that involves a determination whether a discharge should be changed under the equity standards, to ensure a fair standard his administered,...