Upgrade.Vet

NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700923

Original file (ND0700923.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

ex-GMSR, USN
ND07-00923

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Application Received: 20070626 Characterization Received:

Narrative Reason: MISCONDUCT (SEXUAL PERVERSION) Authority: MILPERSMAN 1910-142

Applicant’s Request:      Characterization change to:
                           Narrative Reason change to:
Applicant’s Issues:       1 . Information presented at NJP was bias and misleading
                           2 . Discharge came 6 months after his NJP, unexpectedly
                           3. Charges were dismissed in civil court
                           4. Inequitable discharge based on one isolated incident


Decision

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall MISCONDUCT (SEXUAL PERVERSION) .

Date: 20 080117             Location: Washington D.C          R epresentation :

Discussion

Issue s 1 & 2 : ( ). The Applicant implies that h is NJP was bias and misleading and that his discharge was unexpected after he felt the issue was resolved . The government enjoys a presumption of regularity in the conduct of its affairs. The Applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support his issue. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the Applicant produced any evidence, to support his. The Applicant’s statements alone do not overcome the government’s presumption of regularity in this case.

Issue s 3 & 4: ( ). A Sailor may be separated for a commission of a serious military or civilian offense when the specific circumstances of the offense warrant separation. A military or civilian conviction is not required for discharge under this provision. Additionally, w hen a Sailor ’s service has been honest and faithful, it is appropriate to characterize that service under honorable conditions. A general ( under honorable conditions ) discharge is warranted when significant negative aspects of a member’s conduct or performance of duty outweigh the positive aspects of the member’s military record. The Applicant’s conduct during the current period of service, which forms the primary basis for determining the character of his service, was marred by the award of one nonjudicial punishme nt (NJP) for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), Article 134 ( Wrongfully commit an indecent a ct). A violation of UCMJ Article 134 is considered a serious offense for which a punitive discharge is authorized if adjudged by a Special or General Courts Martial. An upgrade to honorable would be inappropriate.

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

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive: US N R (DEP)      20031217 - 20041123              Active:
Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Enlistment: 20041124      Years Contracted : ; Extension: Date of Discharge: 20060627
Length of Service : 01 Yrs 07 Mths 04 D ys          Lost Time : Days UA: Days Confine d :
Education Level:         Age at Enlistment:       AFQT: 57          Highest Rank /Rate : GMSA
Evaluation marks (# of occasions):       Performance: 3.0 ( 2 )       Behavior: 2.0 ( 2 )          OTA: 2.86
Awards and Decorations ( per DD 214): NDSM, GWOTSM

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

20050922 :        NJP -- Viol UCMJ Art. 134 - Wrongfully commit an indecent act.
         Awarded - FOP ( $ 618.00 ) for ( 2 months); RIR ( E-1 ); Restr for ( 45 days); Extra duties ( 45 days) . Applicant appealed NJP (20050925). Appeal denied (20051012).

20060316:        Administrative Boaard recommends retention of Applicant

200603 16:        Commanding Officer, RTC Great Lakes recommends the COMNAVPERSCOM separation of Applicant

20060525:        CONNAVPERSCOM recommends separate the Applicant to ASN (M&RA)

200606XX:        ASN (M&RA) approves separation of the Applicant

Discharge Process

Date Notified:                                       20051027
Reason for Discharge:     -
Least Favorable Characterization:

Date Applicant Responded to Notification:                  20051027
Rights Elected at Notification:
         Consult with Counsel
         Obtain Copies of Documents
         Submit Statement(s) (date)                         ( NOT FOUND IN RECORD )
         Administrative Board
         GCMCA review

Administrative Board Date :       20060118
Findings, by preponderance of the evidence:     BY - .
         BY SEPARATION WARRANTED.
Recommendation on Separation: BY
Recommendation on Characterization:     BY

Commanding Officer Recommendation (date):        ( 20060316 )
ASN (M&RA) (date)        (200606XX)
Separation Authority (date):     COMNAVPERSCOM, MILLINGTON, TN ( 20060 60 8)
Reason for discharge directed: -
Characterization directed:
Date Applicant Discharged:       20060627

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), re-issued October 2002, effective 26 April 2005 until Present, Article 1910-142, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL 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 .

C. The Manual for Courts-Martial authorizes the award of a punitive discharge if adjudged as part of the sentence upon conviction by a special or general court-martial for violation of the UCMJ, Article 134.

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, provi ded 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 grante d 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.

Employmen t / 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

Similar Decisions

NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0900425

Original file (ND0900425.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. Based on the BCNR decision to remove the NJP and the DFC, which was the basis for separation, from the Applicant’s record of service, the NDRB voted unanimously to upgrade the discharge characterization to “Honorable” and change the narrative reason to Secretarial Authority. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal...
USMC | DRB | 2008_Marine | MD0801072

Original file (MD0801072.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The CA, per the requirements set out in paragraph 4003 of MCO P5800.16A (Marine Corps Manual for Legal Administration) forwarded the report of NJP to CMC (JAM), with the recommendation the applicant's letter of resignation be accepted and the Applicant be discharged with a “ General (Under Honorable Conditions)” characterization of service. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by...
NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700976

Original file (ND0700976.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Date: 20080110Location:Washington D.C Representation: Discussion : either which the Board cannot form the basis of relief for the Applicant, or the Board does not have the authority to grant the relief for which the Applicant petitioned. 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901806

Original file (ND0901806.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB)DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years of the Applicant’s date of discharge. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities.
NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0701070

Original file (ND0701070.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Additionally, the Board has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities. 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.
NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700704

Original file (ND0700704.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

An upgrade would be inappropriate.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. ” 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. Additionally, the Board has no...
NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501101

Original file (ND0501101.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. 050402: DD Form 214: Applicant discharged under other than honorable conditions under the authority of MILPERSMAN 1910-140 [No narrative reason for discharge was listed on the DD Form 214].050404: COMNAVPERSCOM directed Applicant’s discharge as type warranted by service record by reason of non-retention on active duty. The Applicant may, however, petition the Board...
NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1400910

Original file (ND1400910.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to:Narrative Reason change to: OR Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USNR (DEP)19951207 - 19960818Active:19960819 - 1999021519990216 - 2001071920010720 - 20040805 Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20040806Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20050706Highest Rank/Rate: MA2Length of Service: Year(s) Month(s) 0Day(s)Education Level:AFQT:...
NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001764

Original file (ND1001764.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Based on the Applicant’s repeated alcohol rehabilitation failures after receiving Level II and Level III alcohol rehabilitation treatment, to include two DUIs subsequent to completing treatment (3 career incidents involving driving while under the influence), and a previous COMNAVPERSCOM waiver of administrative separation(Feb 2006), his command processed for separationin accordance with the Naval Military Personnel Manual (MILPERSMAN). On 24 Oct 2008, the Applicant’s Commanding Officer...
NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700954

Original file (ND0700954.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

Awarded – FOP,,,and Retention Warning: 20051012 Types of Documents SubmittedRelated to Military Service: DD 214: Service and/or Medical Record: Other Records: Related to Post-Service Period: Employment: Finances: Education/Training: Health/Medical Records: Substance Abuse: Criminal Records: Family/Personal Status: Community Service: References: Additional Statements From Applicant: From Representation: From Member of Congress: Other Documentation (Describe) DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL...

Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700923

Similar Decisions