Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00382
Original file (ND02-00382.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-AE2, USN
Docket No. ND02-00382

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 020213, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions and the reason for the discharge be changed to sexual harassment. The Applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. The Applicant did not list any as the representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 021022. 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: UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910 - 142 (formerly 3630605).

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as submitted

 1. I respectfully request to have my discharge upgraded. My discharge was inequitable because it was based on violating the UCMJ one time in fifteen years and refusing to participate in the administrative board.

2. My commanding officer also recommended a General Discharge based on my years of outstanding service.

There are no words for expressing my regret for doing something so stupid in an organization that always took care of me.

 Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Character Reference Letter
Copies of DD Form 214

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: USN               841218 - 881208  HON
         Active: USN                        881209 - 920226  HON
         Active: USN                        920127 - 960125  HON
         Active: USN                        960126 - 960611  HON
         Active: USN                        960612 - 990218  HON
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     841029 - 841217  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 990219               Date of Discharge: 000918

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 01 06 30
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 33                          Years Contracted: 3

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 64

 Highest Rate: AEC

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks): All Enlisted performance reports were made available to the Board for review.

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: BATTLE"E"RIBBON (3 RD ), NAVY"E"RIBBON, AFEM(2 ND ), MUC(3 RD ), SSDR(5 TH ), Pistol Sharpshooter, NDSM, SASM, OSR(3 RD ), NAM(3 RD ), KLM, GCM(5 TH )

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 :

990219:  Reenlisted at FAIRECONRON FIVE NAS North Island for 3 years.

 000719:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92: (2 Specifications), failure to obey a lawful general regulation to wit: OPNAVINST 5370.2B, paragraphs 5(b) and (c), wrongfully engaging in conduct with a junior enlisted female within the command, which was of an unduly familiar personal nature, and failing to respect the difference in grade and rank with this junior enlisted female, violation of a lawful general order to wit: SECNAVINST 5300.26C, paragraph 8(a) (1)(creating an intimidating, hostile, and offensive working environment for three female Petty Officers within the command; violation of UCMJ Article 134: Assault (Indecent) accompanying a female within the command to a fan room onboard USS JOHN C. STENNIS (CVN-74), tying her arms and legs for a bondage demonstration, fondling her without her permission, and exposing his genital region after the female requested to be released.
         Award: Forfeiture of $1,219.00 pay per month for 2 months, written reprimand. No indication of appeal in the record.
000720:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense-sexual harassment, fraternization, and indecent assault with a junior subordinate.
000720:          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 submit written statements for consideration by Separation Authority and the right to obtain copies of the documents used to support the basis for the separation.
000814:  Commanding Officer recommended a general discharge by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense. Commanding Officer’s verbatim comments: […Unfortunately, AEC D_ (Applicant) had, starting mid-deployment, established an unduly familiar and completely inappropriate relationship with a particularly vulnerable young female petty officer. His appalling and egregious conduct…occurred mostly at night and in secret…It is my opinion that AEC D_ (Applicant) preyed upon this vulnerable petty officer over the span of several months for his own sexual gratification and under the guise of showing concern for her well being. It is also apparent that this may be an isolated incident in what otherwise appears to be 16 years of distinguished service. Based on this belief, I recommend that AEC D_ (Applicant’s) separation be characterized as General]

000907:  COMCARGRU SEVEN 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 000918 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: The NDRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an Applicant's discharge, will change the reason for discharge if such a change is warranted. The summary of service clearly documents the Applicant’s own misconduct and willful disregard for the requirements of military discipline and demonstrated he was unfit for further service. Under other than honorable conditions most clearly describes the Applicant’s character of service. In addition, no other Narrative Reason for Separation more clearly describes why the Applicant was discharged. To change the Narrative Reason for Separation would be inappropriate. Relief denied.

Issue 2: Normally, to permit relief, an error or injustice must have existed during the period of enlistment in question. No such error or injustice occurred 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. 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, an employment record, documentation of community service, certification of non-involvement with civil authorities, are examples of verifiable documents that should have been provided to receive consideration for clemency, based on post-service conduct. The one character reference provided by the Applicant does not mitigate his conduct, and therefore an upgrade based upon post-service conduct is not warranted. 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. Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 30, dated 7 Nov 00, effective 30 Aug 00 until 24 Jan 01, 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 " afls10.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 | 2000_Navy | ND00-00302

    Original file (ND00-00302.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 (C and D).The applicant’s issue states: “The discharge is improper and my discharge was inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident in 17 years of professional, dedicated service with no other adverse action. Thank you.” The NDRB reviewed the applicant’s service record and found the reason for the applicant’s...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00113

    Original file (ND03-00113.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-00113 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 20021025, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :990602: Special Court Martial Charge I: violation of the UCMJ, Article 92 (28 specs): Specification 1: Failed to obey a lawful order by wrongfully possessing a .22 caliber Rifle Ruger in barracks room on 990219. Verifiable proof of any post-service accomplishments...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00666

    Original file (ND03-00666.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions and the reason for the discharge be changed to misconduct. MM2 P_ pleaded guilty at summary court-martial on 22 June 2000 to violating a general order by engaging in hazing activities on board USS ENTERPRISE. Accordingly, I recommend that MM2 P_ be discharged from the naval service for homosexual conduct with a characterization of other than...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00802

    Original file (ND01-00802.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :980402: Civil Conviction: General District Court, Traffic Division, Virginia Beach, VA for violation of driving under the influence (3 rd offense) and refusal to permit a sample of blood or breath to be taken to determine drug/alcohol content on 17Aug97.Sentence: Not listed. Therefore, I concur with the Administrative Board's recommendation that BM2 (applicant) be separated in absentia from the Navy with an Other Than Honorable...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00361

    Original file (ND03-00361.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-EN3, USN Docket No. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Based on the serious of the offense, I recommend EN3 S_ (Applicant) be separated from the naval service with an Other than Honorable discharge.” 010116: CNP recommended to ASN(M&RA) that Applicant be discharged with an Other Than Honorable discharge for...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-01068

    Original file (ND02-01068.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Respectfully; M_ J. D_ (Applicant) Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 BCNR's ltr, dtd Jun 28, 2002, to the Applicant advising him to petition the NDRB Applicant's petition (DD Form 149) to BCNR, dtd May 24, 2002 Memo For Record, dtd Nov 14, 2001, from TPU to Performance Division, PSD Superior Court of State of Delaware count documents (12 pages) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00861

    Original file (ND00-00861.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00861 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000705, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. Another mitigating circumstance at the time of my discharge was the indication by the legal officer involved that there would not be a material difference in perception between an honorable discharge and a general discharge under honorable conditions. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00534

    Original file (ND02-00534.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00534 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020213, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. The discharge is improper because part of the charges for captain's mast was adultery even though my wife and I were legally separated and living apart at the time. No indication of appeal in the record.000331: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01239

    Original file (ND03-01239.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. No indication of appeal in the record.021123: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.021123: Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to waive all...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00610

    Original file (ND02-00610.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00610 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020403, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable and the reason for the discharge be changed to completed required service. Issue 1: The Applicant requested the Board upgrade his discharge to honorable based upon the fact that he believes misappropriating a box of crab legs does not justify a General discharge. For the record, the Applicant was found by an...