Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01385
Original file (ND03-01385.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-ET2, USN
Docket No. ND03-01385

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20030820. 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 20040617. 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 3630605.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

 Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

“1. The discharge I received was based on one incident in an otherwise exemplary naval career of over 9 years. I would like to have my discharge upgraded to honorable. This will aid me in furthering my education by getting my MBA.”
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)     880812 - 880921  COG
         Active: USN                        880922 - 910226  HON

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 910227               Date of Discharge: 971110

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 06 08 14
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 22                          Years Contracted: 6 (12 months extension)

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 93

 Highest Rate: ET1

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 4.00 (7)    Behavior: 4.00 (7)                OTA: 4 .00

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: GCA(2), BATTLE”E”, CGSOR, LOC, NDSM, SSDR, MUC, NM

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

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

GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3630605.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

910227:  Reenlisted at NPTU BALLSTON SPA NY for 6 years with a 12 months extension.

970929:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Violate a lawful general regulation, to wit: OPNAVINST 5370.2A, by wrongfully engaging in an unduly familiar personal relationship with a PO3 on several occasions between 97 January and 97 March; violation of UCMJ Article 134: Between 97 January and 97 March commit adultery with a PO3.
         Award: Forfeiture of $838.00 pay per month for 1 month, restriction and extra duty for 30 days, reduction to E-5. No indication of appeal in the record.
971001:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge general under honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense as evidenced by CO’s NJP of 970930 for violation of the UCMJ, Article 92 (Failure to obey a lawful general regulation) and Article 134 (Adultery).
971006:  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.
970114:  Commanding Officer recommended discharge general under 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 19971110 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 “over nine years.” Despite a servicemember’s prior record of service, certain serious offenses, even though isolated, warrant separation from the naval service in order to maintain proper order and discipline. The Applicant’s service record is marred by award of non-judicial punishment (NJP) for adultery, thus substantiating the misconduct for which he was separated. Additionally, the Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing educational opportunities as requested in the issue. Regulations limit the Board’s review to a determination on the propriety and equity of the discharge. In the Applicant’s case, the Board could discern no impropriety or inequity and therefore considered his discharge proper and equitable. Relief denied.

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. E vidence 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 be provided to receive consideration for relief, based on post-service conduct. At this time, the Applicant has not provided sufficient verifiable documentation of good character and conduct to mitigate his misconduct while on active duty.

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 14, effective
03 Oct 96 until 971212, Article 3630605, 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 | 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 | 2000_Navy | ND00-00411

    Original file (ND00-00411.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MM1 (applicant) went to CO's NJP on board USS MCKEE (AS-41) 96NOV27, for Article 107, false official statement to XO, USS MCKEE, regarding his alleged affair with SK3 H_ and the adultery charge. In the applicant’s issue 3, the Board found that the applicant’s Commanding Officer has the authority to recommend administrative separation for any individual in his command who had committed misconduct. This is a non-decisional issue for the Board.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-01054

    Original file (ND01-01054.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Thirty-three pages from applicant's service record Copy of DD Form 214 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: USN 910717 - 941011 HON USN 941012 - 980226 HON Inactive: USNR (DEP) 901123 - 910716 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 980227 Date of Discharge: 000721 Length of Service...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-01050

    Original file (ND99-01050.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    980903: Assistant Secretary of the Navy (Manpower & Reserve Affairs) approved discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense. 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 first issue, he implies that a permissive doctrine exists whereby one in the military is allowed a “single...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00079

    Original file (ND01-00079.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00079 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 001020, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable or general/under honorable conditions. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of Drug/Alcohol Abuse Rehabilitation Program Acceptance Letter Copy of DD Form 214 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00603

    Original file (ND99-00603.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I am requesting a reversal of “Other Than Honorable Conditions to an “Honorable Discharge.” 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).In the applicant’s issue 1, the Board determined this issue is without...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00624

    Original file (ND00-00624.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In the acknowledgement letter to the applicant, the applicant was informed that the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) first conducts a documentary review prior to any personal appearance hearing. Applicant refused non-judicial punishment.981008: Vacate suspended reduction to HN awarded at CO's NJP of 8Jun98 due to continued misconduct.981020: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge general (under honorable conditions) by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00928

    Original file (ND00-00928.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The discharge shall remain: GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS)/MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910 - 142 (formerly 3630605). 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, the Board has no authority to change re-enlistment codes or make recommendations to permit re-entry into the Naval Service or any other...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01137

    Original file (ND03-01137.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Examples of my work that was not recorded in any evaluation include the following: (See Applicant’s explanation in Supporting Documents).” No indication of appeal in the record.971219: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with a characterization of general under honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense as...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00001

    Original file (ND04-00001.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. _______________________________________________________________________In accordance with 32 C.F.R., section 724.166, and SECNAVINST 5420.174C, enclosure (1), paragraph 1.16, The American Legion submits to the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB or Board) the following statement in support of this Applicant’s petition. This Applicant has not submitted any issues for review.