Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00614
Original file (ND02-00614.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-GSMFN, USN
Docket No. ND02-00614

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 020403, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. The Applicant requested 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 030116. 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 – commission of a serious offense, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630600.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as submitted

1. My discharge was inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident in 22 months of service. I was arrested for having a relation of a sexual nature with a young lady that turned out to be underage. The young lady lied about her age and admitted it. But that was of no concern to the police. I used the wrong judgment in their eyes so I was punished. I never denied having a sexual encounter with the young lady. I was given probation, which meant I could not get underway with my ship. My command made the decision to discharge me. I wanted to stay in and put this behind me. I was caught in a double jeopardy situation. Since then I attended ITT technical institute and receiving my degree in Electronics and I have purchased a home. I was unable to take advantage of my G.I. Bill or any of my V.A. Benefits since my command decided to discharge me. I feel like I was cheated. I know you cannot do anything about the benefits I lost but please find it in your hearts to upgrade my discharge to General under honorable conditions so I can at least get a job with the gov't or a government agency.

Thank You

                  Signed by Applicant

Documentation

In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Copy of DD Form 214
Copy of ADSEP Authorization Message from USS SPRUANCE
Copy of Associate of Applied Science Degree from ITT Technical Institute

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: USN                        None
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     901221 - 910324  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 910325               Date of Discharge: 930120

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 01 09 26
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 19                          Years Contracted: 4 (24 month extension)

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 72

 Highest Rate: GSM3

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 3.40 (1)    Behavior: 3.60 (1)                OTA : 3.60

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NDSM

 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 :

920524:  Civil Conviction: [Court of the Fourth Judicial Circuit in an for Duval County, Florida] for Lewd and Lascivious acts upon a child.
 Sentence: 2 years probation, 2 years of counseling, 80 hours of community service.

921009:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.
921014:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence, violation of UCMJ Article 87: Missing ship's movement, violation of UCMJ Article 120: Carnal knowledge.
         Award: Restriction and extra duty for 17 days. No indication of appeal in the record.
921016:  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 and to submit in my own behalf either verbally or in writing before an Administrative Board or in writing if an Administrative Board is not convened.
921202:  Commanding Officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense. Commanding Officer’s comments (verbatim): [Petty Officer D_ is an above average worker. The psychological counseling schedule imposed as a condition of his plea bargain probation renders GSM3 D_ ineligible of performing duties underway. This consideration and the nature of his infraction argue strongly for immediate discharge of GSM3 D_.]

921210:  BUPERS 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 930120 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 Applicant believes his discharge was inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident in 22 months of service. A characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions is warranted when the service member’s conduct constitutes a significant departure of that expected of a sailor. The Applicant’s service was marred by a civil conviction constituting a serious offense against the UCMJ. An upgrade to general (under honorable conditions) would be inappropriate. Relief denied.

The Veterans Administration determines eligibility for post service benefits not the Naval Discharge Review Board. There is no requirement or law that grants recharacterization solely on the issue of obtaining Veterans’ benefits or improving employment opportunities. These issues do not serve to provide a foundation upon which the Board can grant relief, therefore, relief denied.

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, a positive employment record, documentation of community service and certification of non-involvement with civil authorities are examples of verifiable documents that should have been provided to receive consideration for relief, based on post-service conduct. After a complete review of the record, including the evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board determined that the Applicant’s discharge was proper and equitable and that his evidence of post service accomplishments was found not to mitigate the egregious offense for which he was discharged. 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), effective 15 Aug 91 until
04 Mar 93, 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 | 2004_Navy | ND04-01252

    Original file (ND04-01252.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-UTCN, USN Docket No. ND04-01252 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20040806. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions.

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00470

    Original file (ND99-00470.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 Copy of Enlisted Performance Evaluation Reports for 87Aug17 to 88Mar18, 86Jul01 to 87Jun30, 87Jul01 to 87Aug16, 88Mar18 to 89Jan26 Copy of Enlisted Performance Record Copy of statement on adverse performance evaluation dated 25 January 1989 Fifteen pages from applicant's service record Copy of special request/authorization dated 13 May...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00760

    Original file (ND02-00760.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) also advised that the board first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing. Maturity is a thing of greatness in which I do understand now. No indication of appeal in the record.920207: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense as evidenced by violation of lawful general regulation, to wit: Navy...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01011

    Original file (ND03-01011.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-01011 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030516. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. “Dear Board Members,Applicant), the reason I am submitting this letter is I respectfully request to have my discharge from the Naval Service of Under Other Than Honorable Conditions upgraded to an Honorable Discharge.I have been in Federal Law Enforcement, as a Police Officer (GS-0083)...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00104

    Original file (ND01-00104.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00104 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 001030, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed 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).The applicant’s first issue states that his discharge was inequitable since it was based on “two isolated incidents, neither of which were...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00750

    Original file (ND02-00750.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00750 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020502, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. (DAV Issue) After a review of the Former Service Member (FSM) DD Form 293 Application for the Naval Discharge Review Board of Discharge or Dismissal from the Armed Forces of the United States and all of the evidence assembled for review, we continue to support the contentions as set forth by...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00057

    Original file (ND04-00057.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. I strongly recommend GSMFA W (Applicant) receive an other than honorable discharge from the naval service.950905: BUPERS 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 19950911...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600366

    Original file (ND0600366.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND06-00366 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20051228. The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board’s voted3 to 2 that the discharge shall change to: GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS) BY REASON OF PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00585

    Original file (ND01-00585.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00585 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010327, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. P: Compazine 10 mg___, Bedrest for 24 hours.910215: A: Motion sickness. Applicant's statement dated July 18, 1991 found in service record.910820: Commanding officer recommended discharge honorable by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense and by reason of convenience of the government due to...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00732

    Original file (ND00-00732.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-HN, USN Docket No. ND00-00732 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000518, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. 951116: An Administrative Discharge Board, based upon a preponderance of the evidence and by unanimous vote, found that the applicant had committed a serious offense, that the misconduct warranted...