ex-HN, USN
                                 ND07-00615

                  Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received:  20070409   Characterization Received:
Narrative   Reason:    MISCONDUCT-COMMISSION   OF    A    SERIOUS    OFFENSE
Authority:  MILPERSMAN 1910-142

Applicant’s Request:   Characterization change to:
                 Narrative Reason change to:
Applicant’s Issues:    1. Request investigation into allegations of
physical and verbal abuse
                                  2. Post service-education


                                  Decision

By a vote of  the Characterization shall remain  .
By a vote of  the Narrative Reason shall  PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT.

Date:  20071213              Location:  Washington D.C
Representation:

                                 Discussion

Issue 1.  The Applicant contends that she wanted a Navy career but received
no support from her chain of command while on active duty.  Applicant
alleges that she was physically and verbally assaulted during her
enlistment and is requesting an investigation into this matter.  The
applicant has provided no evidence, nor has the board found any
documentation in member’s record that would substantiate her allegations of
abuse.  Additionally, the board does not have the authority to convene an
investigation into this matter.  However, the Applicant’s record does
indicate that she went to NJP on 20030610 for VUCMJ, Article 128-Assault on
another service member.  She was taken to NJP again on 20040115 for VUCMJ,
Article 91, Insubordinate conduct toward a superior officer or petty
officer. The Applicant’s conduct, which forms the primary basis for
determining the character of her service, reflects her willful failure to
meet the requirements of her contract and falls far short of that required
for an upgrade of her characterization of service.

Issue 2 ().  Applicant states that she has recently received her Bachelors
Degree and is currently enrolled in a Master’s Degree Program.  As it
pertains to post-service conduct, the NDRB is authorized to consider post-
service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge.  However, 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 the
civilian life subsequent to leaving the service.  Normally, to permit
relief, a procedural impropriety or inequity must have been found to have
existed during the period of enlistment in question.  Outstanding post-
service conduct, 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, is considered.  The Applicant provided
a copies of her Associate of Applied Science and Bachelor of Science
Degrees as documentation of post-service accomplishments.  The Applicant's
efforts need to be more encompassing than those provided.  For example, the
Applicant could have produced evidence of a verifiable employment record,
documentation of community service, evidence of drug free existence, and
certification of non-involvement with civil authorities.  The Board
determined that the documentation provided by the Applicant did not
mitigate the misconduct that resulted in the characterization of discharge.

In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of
Government affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut
the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant.  After a
thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s
Summary of Service, Medical and Service Record Entries, Discharge Process
and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found that





            Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

The NDRB did note administrative error(s) on the original DD Form 214:

        “MISCONDUCT (SERIOUS OFFENSE)”
        “HKQ”

The NDRB will recommend to the Commander, Navy Personnel Command, that the
DD 214 be corrected as appropriate.

                             Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive: USNR (DEP)   20001101 - 20001114         Active:
Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment: 20001115 Years Contracted:  ; Extension:        Date of
Discharge:  20051028
Length of Service:  04  Yrs  11  Mths  14  Dys     Lost Time:  Days UA:
Days Confined:
Education Level:       Age at Enlistment:    AFQT:  41   Highest Rank/Rate:
 HN
Evaluation marks (# of occasions):      Performance:  3.3(3)  Behavior:
2.3(3)       OTA:  2.94
Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):  NDSM, GWOTSM, SSDR

  Medical/Service Record Entries Related to Characterization of Service or
                             Basis for Discharge

20030610:   NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art. 128 - Unlawfully strike SK2 by hitting
           him in the throat and attempting to hit him with a tape
           dispenser.
      Awarded - FOP ($645.00) for (1 month); RIR (E-2); Extra duties (21
           days).  FOP and Extra duties suspended for 21 days.

20040115:   NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art. 91 (2 specs) - Insubordinate conduct
           toward warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty
           officer.
      Awarded - FOP ($669.00) for (1 month); RIR (E-2); Extra duties (30
           days).  Extra duties suspended for 90 days).

20040227:   Retention Warning for misconduct due to commission of a serious
           offense and pattern of misconduct as evidenced by Commanding
           Officer’s nonjudicial punishment (NJP) of 20030610, for
           violating the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), Article
           128 - assault consummated by battery, and Commanding Officer’s
           NJP of 20040115, for violating the UCMJ, Article 91 (2
           specifications) - insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer,
           noncommissioned officer, or petty officer.

20051004:   Applicant submitted a conditional waiver request for general
           (under honorable conditions) in lieu of an administrative
           separation board
.

                              Discharge Process

Date Notified:                          20050929
Reason for Discharge:   -
       -
Least Favorable Characterization:

Date Applicant Responded to Notification:          20050929
Rights Elected at Notification:
      Consult with Counsel
      Obtain Copies of Documents
      Submit Statement(s) (date)               (CONDITIONAL WAIVER REQUEST
20051004)
      Administrative Board               (CONDITIONAL WAIVER REQUEST
20051004)


Commanding Officer Recommendation (date):     (20051013)
Separation Authority (date): COMMANDER, NATIONAL NAVAL MEDICAL CENTER
                                  (20051020)
              Reason for discharge directed:  -
              Characterization directed:
Date Applicant Discharged:   20051028

      Types of Documents Submitted by Applicant and Considered By Board

Related to Military Service: Service and/or Medical Record:         Other
Records:

Related to Post-Service Period:
      Employment:                 Finances:                   Education:

      Health/Medical Records:           Substance Abuse:
Criminal Records:
      Family/Personal Status:           Community Service:
References:

Additional Statements From Applicant:   From Representative:
Other Documentation (Describe)

                          Pertinent Regulation/Law

A.  Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), Change 11, effective
26 April 2005 until Present, Article 1910-142, SEPARATION BY REASON OF
MISCONDUCT - COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE.

B.  Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval
Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part II, Para 211,
Regularity of Government Affairs, Part V, Para 502, Propriety and Para 503,
Equity.




                  ADDENDUM:  Information for the Applicant

Complaint Procedures:  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 Instruction
1332.28, you may submit a complaint in accordance with Enclosure (5) of
that Instruction to the Joint Service Review Activity, OUSD (P&R) PI-LP,
The Pentagon, Washington, DC  20301-4000.  You should read Enclosure (5) of
the Instruction 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 Instruction
1332.28 and other Decisional Documents by going online at
“http://Boards.law.af.mil.”

Additional Reviews:  Subsequent to a document review, former members are
eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the 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 additional evidence related to this discharge.
Representation at a personal appearance hearing is recommended but not
required.  If a former member has been discharged for more than 15 years,
has already been granted a personal appearance hearing or has otherwise
exhausted his opportunities before the NDRB, the Applicant may petition the
Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR), 2 Navy Annex, Washington, DC
20370-5100 for further review.

Service Benefits:  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 and this issue does not serve to provide a
foundation upon which the Board can grant relief.

Employment/Educational Opportunities:  The Board has no authority to
upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or
educational opportunities.  Regulations limit the Board’s review to a
determination of the propriety and equity of the discharge.

Reenlistment/RE-code:  Since the NDRB has no jurisdiction over
reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Navy, Marine Corps, or any
other of the Armed Forces, the NDRB is not authorized to change a
reenlistment code.  Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR)
can make changes to reenlistment codes.  Additionally, the Board has no
authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing
reenlistment opportunities.  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.

Medical Conditions and Misconduct:  DoD disability regulations do not
preclude a disciplinary separation.  Appropriate regulations stipulate that
separations for misconduct take precedence over potential separations for
other reasons.  Whenever a member is being processed through the Physical
Evaluation Board, and subsequently is processed for an administrative
involuntary separation for misconduct, the disability evaluation is
suspended.  The Physical Evaluation Board case remains in suspense pending
the outcome of the non-disability proceedings.  If the action includes
either a punitive or administrative discharge for misconduct, the medical
board report is filed in the member’s terminated health record.
Additionally, the NDRB does not have the authority to change a narrative
reason for separation to one indicating a medical disability or “PTSD.”
Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records can grant this type of
narrative reason change.

Automatic Upgrades - 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 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 may be provided to the Board include proof of
educational pursuits, verifiable employment records, documentation of
community service, credible evidence of a substance free lifestyle and
certification of non-involvement with civil authorities.

Issues Concerning Bad-Conduct Discharges (BCD) – Because relevant and
material facts stated in a court-martial specification are presumed by the
NDRB to be established facts, issues relating to the Applicant’s innocence
of charges for which he was found guilty cannot form a basis for relief.
With respect to a discharge adjudged by a court-martial, the action of the
NDRB is restricted to upgrades based on clemency.  Clemency is an act of
leniency that reduces the severity of the punishment imposed.

Board Membership:  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:

                         Secretary of the Navy Council of Review Boards
                         Attn:  Naval Discharge Review Board
                         720 Kennon Street SE Rm 309
                         Washington Navy Yard DC  20374-5023