Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01449
Original file (ND03-01449.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-PC3, USN
Docket No. ND03-01449

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20030909. 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 20040712. 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. “I was given an administrative separation Sept, 2, 02. The reason I was given an administrative separation was because of a civilian charge that happened off base, off-duty hours. Even though you are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty, I was still punished prematurely, so instead of receiving an honorable discharge I was given a general discharge. I was told by my legal counsel that if my charges were dropped I could attempt to get my discharge updated. After I was discharged in Sept. 02, 2002 several months passed before I found out the outcome of my case. On Feb-3-2003 my attorney M_ W_ C_ contacted me and told me my charges were dismissed. And I have enclosed in this envelope the official document from my attorney. I don’t feel I should be punished when I have been proven innocent. A matter like this could follow me my entire life. I would greatly appreciate you assistance in this matter.”

 Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Copy of DD Form 214(member 4)
Letter from Attorney at Law, M_ W_ C_, dated March 20, 2003

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: USNR (DEP)     970618 - 970901  COG
         Active: USN                        None

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 970902               Date of Discharge: 020901

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 05 00 00
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 19                          Years Contracted: 4 (12 months extension)

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: Unknown

 Highest Rate: PC3

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: NMA*        Behavior: NMA             OTA: NMA

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NRMRGCM, SSDR(2), NER, NDSM

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

*No Marks Available for review

 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 :
020403:  Applicant apprehended by the Gulfport police department, Gulfport, Mississippi and charged with sexual battery and child pornography.

020603:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.
020603:          Applicant advised of his rights and having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to appear before an Administrative Discharge Board.

 020806:  Applicant waived his rights to an Administrative Discharge Board.

 020815:  Commanding Officer’s comments: PC3 P_ (Applicant) has no potential for future naval service. PC3 P_(Applicant) was the most senior naval member present when a 15-year-old female performed as a stripper for 12 members of the naval service in a private residence off base. The 23-year old was videotaped as the service member’s fondled and digitally penetrated her. Local authorities apprehended the members and charged them with sexual battery and child pornography. The arrest brought media attention and discredit upon the armed services. Subsequent to the arrest, the incident was determined by local authorities not to be a “pornography ring” but a single instance of multiple partner consensual sex with a juvenile that was videotaped by one of the participants. PC3 P_(Applicant), the most senior member present, received a “lap dance” from the 15-year-old which is included on the videotape. PC3 P_(Applicant) did not appear interactive with the female, but made no attempt to stop her nor other members present who were fondling her during the lap dance. PC3 P_(Applicant) behavior cannot be tolerated. Although civil charges are still pending, I have found that PC3 P_(Applicant) actions and failure to act rise to the level of “deviant sexual behavior.” I find by a preponderance of the evidence that PC3 P_(Applicant) actions are in violation of the UCMJ, Article 134: Indecent acts or liberties with a child and misprision of a serious offense (sodomy and attempted carnal knowledge). Given the seriousness of the offenses I most strongly recommend that he be separated from the Naval service by reason of misconduct commission of a serious offense with an Other Than Honorable characterization of service.

020815:  Commander, Navy Region Southeast directed 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 20020901 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 available 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: Commission of a serious offense does not require adjudication by nonjudicial, judicial proceedings or civilian conviction; however the offense must be substantiated by a preponderance of evidence. The statements and documents provided by the Applicant do not refute the presumption of regularity in this case. The evidence of record does not demonstrate that the Applicant was not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions. The Applicant was provided the opportunity to present his case to an administrative board, but waived that right, thus accepting the discharge recommended in the letter of notification. 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 Board determined that the documentation submitted by the Applicant does not 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), 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 | ND02-00806

    Original file (ND02-00806.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00806 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020513, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. Although the Applicant claims immaturity and family responsibilities as the reasons for his unauthorized absence, t 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00299

    Original file (ND01-00299.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I have submitted this application because I would like to re-enter the Navy. 981229: Commander, Naval Training Center, Great Lakes authorized the applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense. Although the applicant’s discharge characterization was proper at the time of discharge, because of equitable considerations, the Board voted to grant the applicant relief, and change his discharge characterization to...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00684

    Original file (ND00-00684.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND00-00684 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000508, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. The discharge shall remain: UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910 - 142 (formerly 3630605). Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00779

    Original file (ND01-00779.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00779 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010516, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. The discharge shall remain: UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/MISCONDUCT, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 1910 - 142 (formerly 3630605). 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00120

    Original file (ND01-00120.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, 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 obligation to change the applicant's discharge in order to allow him to obtain better employment. At this time, the applicant has not provided...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00547

    Original file (ND02-00547.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND02-00547 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020318, requested that the characterization of service on the 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:Copy of DD Form 214. The Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities as requested in the issue.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00719

    Original file (ND00-00719.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    During XOI, Capt V_____ told me that they would do everything possible to ensure my benefits, specifically the G.I. 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): Active: USN None Inactive: USNR (DEP) 941221 - 950711 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 950712 Date of...

  • 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 | ND03-00697

    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 | 2001_Navy | ND01-00721

    Original file (ND01-00721.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Decision A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 011127. Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events : 990512: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: Unauthorized absence. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 000914 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (A).